i don’t think it’s as simple as ‘covering bases’ to be going up against a well-resourced party structure on its own terms and expecting change. to me that is an unrealistic expectation.
There are weaknesses in most structures, you just have to find them. The right-wing takeover of the USA has demonstrated this, even if it did take them decades to accomplish it.
i’d rather see challengers running under a different party, i just have zero confidence in the democrats at this point.
There have been other parties for quite some time. They’re lucky to have even 1% of the population’s awareness, however. America’s electoral system virtually guarantee it’ll stay this way, which is why I see disrupting the Democratic party from within as the more likely to be viable approach for the time being. We can work towards progressives splitting off into their own party at some point, but they need to get bigger first or they’ll lose and take their reputations down with that loss.
i promise that i am not trying to get all debate-y, however this is circular.
progressives need to get bigger inside the democratic party before they can leave, but the democratic party structurally prevents them from getting big enough to matter.
the right wing takeover of the republicans was because we have a politics where money speaks louder than people. that’s why i don’t expect a left wing takeover of the democrats will work either.
a workers party isn’t going to emerge from inside the democratic party. it’s going to emerge from the kind of organizing and dual power building that creates enough independent capacity to make electoral politics secondary rather than the primary terrain.
progressives need to get bigger inside the democratic party before they can leave, but the democratic party structurally prevents them from getting big enough to matter.
The DNC certainly puts up a hell of a fight, yet more progressives are set to take up positions within the party. There are a good number on ballots across the US, and it’s inevitable the number will grow this November. I get the pessimism - really, I do - but I think it’s possible to overcome the power of the DNC establishment, especially as a number of them (like Pelosi) age out.
the right wing takeover of the republicans was because we have a politics where money speaks louder than people. that’s why i don’t expect a left wing takeover of the democrats will work either.
The thing is that only works when enough of their constituency also feel like they’re making enough money to be comfortable. With the wealth of the country being concentrated into fewer and fewer people, that also means there are fewer who feel that way. That, IMHO, is a significant part of the reason why progressives have started seeing so many successes of late.
Nonetheless, I’m interested in hearing what alternative approaches you feel would work better. Up until the next quote, you’ve been very vague about what you mean, so thank you for the next bit:
a workers party isn’t going to emerge from inside the democratic party. it’s going to emerge from the kind of organizing and dual power building that creates enough independent capacity to make electoral politics secondary rather than the primary terrain.
That does indeed seem extremely ambitious, and I’m curious how you see that coming about short of a full-on revolution. I’m assuming “tankies” are well-versed in this, but I am not, and that may be the source of the problem. Unfortunately, being less educated in this area means I likely can’t just dive into reading the literature I’ve occasionally seen recommended. The way my mind works requires an overarching summary for me to build my exploration of the subject upon - without the groundwork, it can quickly become all too abstract for my mind to put the pieces together.
pelosi + co aging out just means a new crop of corporate democrats take over. the machine does not depend on individuals and there’s plenty of young ghouls waiting in the wings.
‘progressive’ is pretty much branding at this point. someone can call themselves progressive while supporting weapons shipments to a genocide and opposing medicare for all because it’s ‘not politically feasible’
the label does no analytical work at all.
I’m assuming “tankies” are well-versed in this
they tend to be, i’m an anarchist and i’ve had many mls work with me in a positive way locally over the years.
I’m curious how you see that coming about short of a full-on revolution.
i did spell it out in that same statement, but maybe it was not clear enough.
when i said ‘organizing and dual power building’ i’m thinking of things like mutual aid as entrypoint. the idea that building networks where people can take care of eachother outside the market both meets immidiate needs and builds the relationships to make future organizing possible.
the ELI5 version would be summed up as 'build things that work outside the market, make peoples lives better now, demonstrate that another way of organizing is possible. ‘voting’ may be a tiny sliver of your time in the year, but electoral politics takes an inordinate amount of resources and time. despite all that effort any one election can flip the script on decades of work.
i could recommend reading material if you’re interested in de-naturalizing some of the operational assumptions of capitalism.
pelosi + co aging out just means a new crop of corporate democrats take over. the machine does not depend on individuals and there’s plenty of young ghouls waiting in the wings.‘progressive’ is pretty much branding at this point. someone can call themselves progressive while supporting weapons shipments to a genocide and opposing medicare for all because it’s 'not politically feasible’the label does no analytical work at all.
All true & reasonably fair. I guess I just have been trying to allow some room for having to work within the system as it currently stands, but I do also fear the corruption of the well-intended is real & potentially permanent. I’ve been hoping the addition of more progressives would help counterbalance that - and am still waiting to see if that plays out, but you may well be right in that there is no return from the dark side.
i’m an anarchist
Oh, cool! I’ve actually kinda begun looking at that community a bit closer recently as what little I’ve gleaned from posts I’ve seen seems to more closely fit my perspectives than other alternatives (you can see I’m just not “getting” the .ml left). Just preliminary starting to pay them more attention at this point, but definitely interested.
when i said ‘organizing and dual power building’ i’m thinking of things like mutual aid as entrypoint. the idea that building networks where people can take care of eachother outside the market both meets immidiate needs and builds the relationships to make future organizing possible.
Yep, that’s what I’d like to see, too. I’m curious how the inevitable bad players are prevented from using/abusing/destroying such idealist constructs, tho. I admit my life has made me perhaps a bit too cynical, but I just don’t see those sorts of initiatives surviving long-term against the high proportion of ill-willed people out there.
the ELI5 version
Okay, I asked for that. That’s more than little too vague to help. I guess I’m looking for something concrete & just detailed enough to be able to picture it in action. What I was trying to avoid was a high proportion of theory. I’m someone who needs to see it working first, then get to know “how,” and finally the “why” of how it works after that.
i could recommend reading material
My patience for reading heady stuff of late seems to be tied to my level of understanding and strength of interest. I like it concrete, to-the-point, with just enough detail to get the idea without being too wordy (which I know seems at odds with the way I write ::shrug::) It’s just the way I structured my information intake over the course of my life while trying to teach myself about the world at large). That’s the best way to get through to me. If you know of anything like that, please do share!
Finally, it’s well past bedtime for me. I’d really like to thank you for this conversation. I can be very thick-headed, and appreciate you sticking with me through it. Unfortunately, I’ve GOT to get some sleep as I’ve been up over 36 hrs at this point with only a couple short naps, and I just can’t do this stuff anymore like when as i was young.
There are weaknesses in most structures, you just have to find them. The right-wing takeover of the USA has demonstrated this, even if it did take them decades to accomplish it.
There have been other parties for quite some time. They’re lucky to have even 1% of the population’s awareness, however. America’s electoral system virtually guarantee it’ll stay this way, which is why I see disrupting the Democratic party from within as the more likely to be viable approach for the time being. We can work towards progressives splitting off into their own party at some point, but they need to get bigger first or they’ll lose and take their reputations down with that loss.
i promise that i am not trying to get all debate-y, however this is circular.
progressives need to get bigger inside the democratic party before they can leave, but the democratic party structurally prevents them from getting big enough to matter.
the right wing takeover of the republicans was because we have a politics where money speaks louder than people. that’s why i don’t expect a left wing takeover of the democrats will work either.
a workers party isn’t going to emerge from inside the democratic party. it’s going to emerge from the kind of organizing and dual power building that creates enough independent capacity to make electoral politics secondary rather than the primary terrain.
The DNC certainly puts up a hell of a fight, yet more progressives are set to take up positions within the party. There are a good number on ballots across the US, and it’s inevitable the number will grow this November. I get the pessimism - really, I do - but I think it’s possible to overcome the power of the DNC establishment, especially as a number of them (like Pelosi) age out.
The thing is that only works when enough of their constituency also feel like they’re making enough money to be comfortable. With the wealth of the country being concentrated into fewer and fewer people, that also means there are fewer who feel that way. That, IMHO, is a significant part of the reason why progressives have started seeing so many successes of late.
Nonetheless, I’m interested in hearing what alternative approaches you feel would work better. Up until the next quote, you’ve been very vague about what you mean, so thank you for the next bit:
That does indeed seem extremely ambitious, and I’m curious how you see that coming about short of a full-on revolution. I’m assuming “tankies” are well-versed in this, but I am not, and that may be the source of the problem. Unfortunately, being less educated in this area means I likely can’t just dive into reading the literature I’ve occasionally seen recommended. The way my mind works requires an overarching summary for me to build my exploration of the subject upon - without the groundwork, it can quickly become all too abstract for my mind to put the pieces together.
So, got any ELI5-level explainers? Please & TY.
pelosi + co aging out just means a new crop of corporate democrats take over. the machine does not depend on individuals and there’s plenty of young ghouls waiting in the wings.
‘progressive’ is pretty much branding at this point. someone can call themselves progressive while supporting weapons shipments to a genocide and opposing medicare for all because it’s ‘not politically feasible’
the label does no analytical work at all.
they tend to be, i’m an anarchist and i’ve had many mls work with me in a positive way locally over the years.
i did spell it out in that same statement, but maybe it was not clear enough.
when i said ‘organizing and dual power building’ i’m thinking of things like mutual aid as entrypoint. the idea that building networks where people can take care of eachother outside the market both meets immidiate needs and builds the relationships to make future organizing possible.
the ELI5 version would be summed up as 'build things that work outside the market, make peoples lives better now, demonstrate that another way of organizing is possible. ‘voting’ may be a tiny sliver of your time in the year, but electoral politics takes an inordinate amount of resources and time. despite all that effort any one election can flip the script on decades of work.
i could recommend reading material if you’re interested in de-naturalizing some of the operational assumptions of capitalism.
All true & reasonably fair. I guess I just have been trying to allow some room for having to work within the system as it currently stands, but I do also fear the corruption of the well-intended is real & potentially permanent. I’ve been hoping the addition of more progressives would help counterbalance that - and am still waiting to see if that plays out, but you may well be right in that there is no return from the dark side.
Oh, cool! I’ve actually kinda begun looking at that community a bit closer recently as what little I’ve gleaned from posts I’ve seen seems to more closely fit my perspectives than other alternatives (you can see I’m just not “getting” the .ml left). Just preliminary starting to pay them more attention at this point, but definitely interested.
Yep, that’s what I’d like to see, too. I’m curious how the inevitable bad players are prevented from using/abusing/destroying such idealist constructs, tho. I admit my life has made me perhaps a bit too cynical, but I just don’t see those sorts of initiatives surviving long-term against the high proportion of ill-willed people out there.
Okay, I asked for that. That’s more than little too vague to help. I guess I’m looking for something concrete & just detailed enough to be able to picture it in action. What I was trying to avoid was a high proportion of theory. I’m someone who needs to see it working first, then get to know “how,” and finally the “why” of how it works after that.
My patience for reading heady stuff of late seems to be tied to my level of understanding and strength of interest. I like it concrete, to-the-point, with just enough detail to get the idea without being too wordy (which I know seems at odds with the way I write ::shrug::) It’s just the way I structured my information intake over the course of my life while trying to teach myself about the world at large). That’s the best way to get through to me. If you know of anything like that, please do share!
Finally, it’s well past bedtime for me. I’d really like to thank you for this conversation. I can be very thick-headed, and appreciate you sticking with me through it. Unfortunately, I’ve GOT to get some sleep as I’ve been up over 36 hrs at this point with only a couple short naps, and I just can’t do this stuff anymore like when as i was young.
Thanks again so much! Good night.