Bumping up the link to this thoughtful Guardian piece that Charley included in a comment in order to to test the waters — can we resolve the left/liberal divide or is our future to be fratricide (and boredom)?
Please share widely!
Strongly Recommended Reading
I thought that this was a great piece, and really appreciate both editors sharing it here. I hope we can engage with the piece in this thread rather than rehashing old arguments and political feuds that have become personal here.
I thought the framing around loyalty was really instructive. I think it really summarizes the difference between someone like me, passionate about preferred policy outcomes and the candidates who will achieve them, and someone like Christopher passionate and knowledgeable about process who places as much value on input as well as output. I don’t think it takes a side-and I think the piece forces us to forge a workable hybrid between these goals.
I think we can all aspire to be “vigorously critical party loyalists”. I feel like I meet this goal more often than not, but obviously fall short of it sometimes. This means we shouldn’t venerate any fallible politician as a secular saint. It means the loyalists should welcome and embrace newcomers from outside traditional party politics and teach them/encourage them how to play by their rules. And they should learn those rules and play by them to be effective advocates on the inside as well. It means both sides should be open to changing and questioning the rules to make processes better.
It means we have open and vigorous primary challenges even for incumbents. It means we back the nominee, even when our candidate loses. It means loyalists recognize the Democratic Party and the two party system has flaws. It means leftists recognize the current Republican Party is a unique threat to our political, economic, and ecological system and defeating it is our first priority.
It means loyalists should be open to real electoral reform like ranked choice voting, equal time laws, and campaign finance reform to encourage multiparty democracy and coalition building; and embracing those reforms internally. It means leftists recognize that the Democratic Party is the best vehicle to advance those reforms.
Haven’t had time to read the article, which looks good. A pleasant change from the the mainstream bullshit of the Dems in disarray. Blah… Blah… Blah….
1) Parties are weakening in general. a) We live in an era when people aren’t big on belong and joining. (See Bowling Alone). b) Well-funded outside groups are taking over traditional party roles (See GOP).
2) A new generation is coming on line. They look at things differently and much less centralized. (See Occupy and BLM).
Both of these trends clash not only with the Establishment, but with loyalty (a theme of the linked article). Loyalty has been the mainstay of party politics for a long time. In fact, it is the currency of party politics. (I’m presently making phone calls for a mayoral candidate I don’t even know personally because a Democratic friend asked me).
I respect that Mark-that’s old school. It’s also entirely alien to the way I look at politics. I’d have to know all their ratings before I’d make a call on behalf of a stranger đŸ˜‰
When I read the linked article I instantly recognized the exchanges we have had, with you as the leftist and me as the liberal, but I agree that it takes both to make this work:)
Again, I think that Chris Matthews nailed it when he described the divide in the party with the following advice to party leaders, “listen to the voters, not the donors”.
I actually think that’s a good point John. Neither the “liberals” or “leftists” at BMG or on this piece are the “donors”. We’ve all been the boots on the ground in political activism-be it by participating in the official party or for causes and candidates. We have a lot more in common because of those experiences and our shared policy concerns, and a lot to learn from one another.
I think all of us here agree on key things that were once laughed out of American politics: choice, gay rights, unions, single payer, gun control, stopping climate change, living wages, and rebuilding America instead of the Middle East. I can’t think of anyone here who would disagree with those broad goals, we need to work through our disagreements on how to get there rather than pitting party loyalty against ideological purity.
I’m for fratricide.
No I’m not, of course, but honestly there needs to be some healthy bloodletting. Time for the left to drive for a while, for the many, not the few.
Why? The liberals screwed up and we got The Donald. And the liberals don’t even understand how they screwed up. It is all someone else’s fault.
Does that sound harsh? My harshest criticism is for the left, unable or unwilling to clean house and take charge.
That is the dynamic that democratic organizations go through: there is conflict that leads to some transformation.
You want it to be like a healthy marriage, not without fighting, but fighting that is fair and principled and oriented towards moving forward.
But nobody here is a good fighter in that sense, so I expect we will get The Donald again, or the whirlwind he plants.