Our future is center-left not far-left. The business community and DLC, not OWS

[BrentWil]

Mic Check....

At one time, OWS received a lot of love on DU. However, it wasn't a relevant movement. The last election wasn't won because of groups like OWS. The last election was won because we were the lesser of two evils, in many minds. The American people don't want radical change. They want moderate reforms. With moderate reforms, we are much more likely to find allies in the business community, then a group like OWS. In an age where the tea party is coming to dominate the GOP, the business community needs allies that can offer them stability. They are the natural organizations to work with to ensure pragmatic reforms for the future.

Protest movements are most effective when they use civil disobedience to highlight state polices that are not just. Two key examples of this are Martin Luther King and Gandhi. Gandhi with his Satyagrah and Martin Luther King with his nonviolence, practiced one thing that OWS never had: Discipline and leadership. OWS is a leaderless organization by its own admission. Nor does not it have a clear set of goals. As such, it does not have the ability to enforce behavior standards on its members, as both Gandhi and King did. Without discipline and leadership, OWS was quickly demonized as radicals. They were more effective for the right then they were for the left. In many ways, they are similar to the Tea Party. They are quickly denounced as radicals and more useful to the other side. However, OWS did of a core truth. The simple message that “this level of wealth inequality is unhealthy”, is a powerful message. To bring that message to bear, one has to be focused and disciplined. That is something the far-left lacks. Moreover, quick and radical change is often more damaging then good. Long-term pragmatic reforms are the way to help the whole of society.

We on the Left should not want the business community to fail. Their success should be rewarded and we should want American companies with American workers to succeed globally. That said, we should work with them to find means to address what is a fundamental weakness of the American system, extreme inequity of wealth. The American economy needs a strong consumer and a strong middle class is how an economy maintains a strong middle class. A government that has a safety net, a progressive tax system, and programs to build a middle class is good for everyone. Instead of demonizing the business world, we should be working with them.

This may seem odd to some. However, the Republican party is dominated by the Tea Party now. They favor an extreme ideology that will undermine the very system the business community needs to remain profitable. The fact is, no one has more to lose from another debt ceiling fight then the business. That is why Obama is reaching out to them now. That is why we should move to position our party as the moderate party. Yes, we believe in a solid middle class. However, we also believe in American business. We do not think that American business is our enemy.

[mike_c]

1. I'm a socialist....

...so I think we still have a way to go. Greed is not a virtue. That "business community" you laud has core values whose ultimate expression is the Walmart-ization of American life, social injustice and the destruction of worker's hopes for a better life. Sorry. The real left repudiates that, or at least they did the last time I checked.

[liberal_at_heart]

12. corporate America has spent the past few decades making sure they make more

while their workers make less. When you look at the charts of profits and wages over the course of a few decades it is staggering. I agree with you mike_c. We have a long way to go and we need more groups like OWS and the labor unions to fight back. We need a movement of and for the people not for the corporations.

[BrentWil]

62. Profits are fine

Taking the profits and using them to not benefit the long term interests company is. The government has a role in encouraging the market to look after long term value.

[BrentWil]

58. You can find the "ultimate expression" in many places

The model has also freed millions from poverty. Central planning and collective ownership gave also caused serious problems..

One shouldn't get too ideological on this. Pragmatism is under rated.

[msongs]

2. the "business community" will save tons of $ if we go to universal health care...

businesses would be a huge ally for this far left concept if we just explained what was in it for them in terms of costs savings

[HiPointDem]

17. some would, but they'll save just as much if they, like walmart, pay their employees welfare wages

and let taxpayers pick up the tab for the healthcare.

businesses that are forced to pay higher wages will save through the 'voucherization' of health care inherent in obamacare.

but medical-oriented businesses would generally lose under universal care, as would insurance & related financial businesses -- and they are solid opponents.

so there you have it. we can't have universal health care because big pharma & big finance don't want it.

[BrentWil]

122. I have always thought the government is the way to solve this in a modern economy

For example a reverse income tax that takes our most of our society from paying taxes and supports people who are lower waged.

[BrentWil]

63. The only reason we did expand coverage

Is that the Obama worked with the health care industry. I agree, it would. However it wouldn't help everyone and those interests would fight hard.

[Scootaloo]

3. There's no problem with the business community

The problem is the parasite community that hollows out the business community and lives in its corpse to claim "business" status. Our government's policies apparently can't tel lthe difference, and thus serves as another host for the parasites, in a life cycle not so different from the liver fluke.

The "Business community" needs a very thorough de-worming, is all

[BrentWil]

124. There is a told for a strong government

That provides Encougement for long term growth not short term gain.

[patrice]

128. +++1

[kelliekat44]

4. Well, then, ket the business community needs to think more about what allows them to

be a"profitable" business...their customers. There was a time when businesses valued good, loyal workers, and were happy to make reasonable profits. Now neither small, medium, or large businesses are satisfied unless they return at least 500% profit. It's always the bottom line over their customers and employees. There was also a time when businesses that couldn't make it simply folded. Risk was real and everyone knew it. Now all businesses, especially the large corporations want "risk free" businesses and investments. It's ruining capitalism and making socialism impossible.

[BrentWil]

125. A strong government is needed for the long term success of business. NT

[freshwest]

200. It has to regulate business to keep it from destroying itself, devouring true productivity and...

Its value to the people who work there, the environment, and the consumers. Government is needed to counter the single-mindedness of the business structure to only make profit. When social responsiblity is discarded for that goal, it becomes predatory and destructive of the nation. Also business has no right to make foreign policy to feather its own nest at the expense of lives or the world's environment.

[BrentWil]

202. I agree...

That us why a strong government is needed.

[jeff47]

5. DLC is center right. OWS is center left.

Don't get your concept of "left" and "right" from Republicans. You end up looking like you don't know what the far left actually is.

[Art_from_Ark]

21. I get the feeling that "far left" in today's jargon

would have been called "moderate Republican" back in the '60s.

[BrentWil]

141. That actually isn't to far from the truth

The political spectrum has swung way right since the 60s.

[BrentWil]

64. The political spectrum is different in different countries.

I have described the one in the American construct.

[jeff47]

76. No, you haven't

There are actual communists in the US, for example. The fact that the media refuses to cover the actual left doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

[BrentWil]

78. They do exist. They just aren't important. NT

[jeff47]

92. The media says so. But the media's wrong.

Again, you are basing "left and right" on Republican framing being repeated by the media. Not what the public actually believes.

For example, the media claims the tax increase on the wealthy is "unpopular" or "radical". But >60% of the country wants it. That's not unpopular nor radical.

[BrentWil]

142. No the public does favor that

I favor that too. That said, don't judge on one data point.

[socialist_n_TN]

147. It's not just one data point........

Many polls have shown that this country actually IS center-left, not center-right. But you can't judge it on self identification, i.e., liberal, moderate, conservative. The only way the numbers actually work is if you include moderate with liberal.

BTW, the "center-left" POLICIES that the polls show majorities favor are NOT your version of "center-left" which is warmed over Reaganism.

[jeff47]

165. Do I have to link the definition of "example" for you?

You want us to take your opinion seriously when you can't understand the concept of an example?

Seriously?

And yes, the public does favor raising taxes on the wealthy. Poll after poll after poll says so: https://www.google.com/search?q=raise+taxes+poll

If you can't get that right, why are we supposed to believe your assessment of where "left" and "right" are in the country?

[Eleanors38]

107. Mickey Edwards, former GOP congressman from OK,

was once considered one of the most conservative members. He said on PBS' Moyers, his views would now be considered "liberal."

That's how far the false dichotemy has ventured into fantasy land. There is little that I consider as liberal in the Democratic leadership.

[BrentWil]

143. The President is center right in the 1960s

I would argue

[Eleanors38]

179. More so than FDR, but less than JFK, Carter, Clinton & Obama.

With Carter, there was at least an attempt to shed the "Cold War Liberal" label, which LBJ embraced.

[LWolf]

212. +1

[white_wolf]

6. Threads like this make me miss unrec.

The DLC can go straight to hell, New Democrats, centrists, moderates, or whatever new code name they adopt all mean the same thing. Support of the rich over the poor. They should not even be allowed in the Democratic party. They are no better than the Republicans.

[Mnemosyne]

13. +1000 nt

[Raksha]

14. "The DLC can go straight to hell" - music to my ears,

and that goes for the rest of your post too!

[bullwinkle428]

16. Oh, and FUCK Third Way while we're at it!

[leftstreet]

23. +1

[DirkGently]

29. 8)

[hrmjustin]

33. I was juror number 3

AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service

At Tue Dec 11, 2012, 12:15 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

Threads like this make me miss unrec.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=1959052

REASON FOR ALERT:

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate. (See <a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=aboutus#communitystandards" target="_blank">Community Standards</a>.)

ALERTER'S COMMENTS:

No comments added by alerter

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Tue Dec 11, 2012, 12:23 AM, and the Jury voted 1-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: The alerter is an ass. The DLC can kiss my ass.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: We're not in a red zone prior to an election, so people should be free to view their true political beliefs about the Dem party.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: You don't tell me why I need to hide then you get no hide. I do think the post is over the top, but heartfelt. I think we do need moderates, but I do not trust the DLC.
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Ok, I see the post was edited, I'm going to give the poster the benefit of the doubt that he or she did not directly attack the OP personally, and as for the rest, I think that can stand.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[coalition_unwilling]

44. Jesus Christ, but Juror #4 makes me question the universal franchise. If you're going

to vote to suppress an opinion, by God, you'd better explain yourself. WTF???

[UnrepentantLiberal]

34. Here here!

Fuck the DLC.

[JoeyT]

84. +1 n/t

[jsr]

108. Job creators über alles

I find it unconscionable that to this day, our socialist government hasn't set aside a national holiday for workers to work harder to honor our hardworking corporate CEOs and business executives.

[uponit7771]

118. +1

[truebluegreen]

134. +1,000 nt

[nc4bo]

144. ++1. nm

[Wind Dancer]

184. Same here!

There are certain threads that make me wonder if I've stumbled upon the wrong site.

[Duncan Grant]

191. +1 (nt)

[JaneyVee]

7. No one wants the business community to fail. Just a return to ethics & morals in business.

[Union Scribe]

8. Do you believe in right-to-work?

Like your business allies do?

[Zorra]

9. Take your cheap Third Way corporatist propaganda and stick it where the sun don't shine.

We're not buying what you are marketing anymore. Reaganism is dead.

Mic check? My ass.

Lame.

[YoungDemCA]

10. +1

nt

[99Forever]

18. Yep.

Corporatist drivel, smells like pig dung.

[UnrepentantLiberal]

35. I couldn't have said it better.

[YoungDemCA]

11. "We do not think that American business is our enemy."

Let us know when American business stops thinking of us as their enemy.


Oh wait, there's no "us" here...

[bullwinkle428]

15. Could you please point out this huge groundswell movement for "reforms"?

[LeftyMom]

19. Please don't make me roll my eyes quite so forcefully. It hurts a bit.

[Douglas Carpenter]

20. the current economic model is not sustainable and cannot possibly sustainably provide a western

Last edited Tue Dec 11, 2012, 02:33 AM - Edit history (1)

standard of living for the majority of a nation with a population of 300,000,000 + people. The DLC model is far closer to the Mitt Romney economic model than either the traditional New Deal model or even the George Romney liberal Republican model. It was a so-called center-left administration that pushed through the trade agreements that killed most of what of remained of America as an industrial exporter. It was a so-called center-left administration - working together graciously in a spirit of bipartisanship with their Republicans colleagues in Congress that signed into law much of the deregulation of the financial industry thus setting the stage for the greatest economic meltdown since the great depression. It was a so-called center-left administration that killed off much of what remained of the reforms of the New Deal and the Geat Society.

We are now in a political framing where being liberal or being labeled as a radical socialist by Fox News and the Republican party is simply declaring that we are going to essentially do the Republican policy - but we will be a bit more incremental about it. How can any progress be made when we approach an argument that way?

OWS for all of its failing framed the election to a large extent. People did NOT adopt a disliking for Mitt Romney because they thought he was a right-wing ideologue. Clearly very few people saw him that way. They acquired a disliking for Mtt Romney because he incarnates the new capitalism - where wealth is not acquired by making things, opening factories and providing jobs. Wealth is acquired by grand crap shoots where simple roles of the dices close down factories, destroys jobs and end futures. The Democrats very successfully and frankly quite hypocritically capitalized on this and successfully painted Mitt Romney with that brush. But truth be told for the last few decades the Mitt Romney capitalist model has been barely distinguishable from the centrist Democratic Party model. This may have worked for an election cycle - in fact a few election cycles. But you cannot fool the people forever. At some point that are going to want to see real differences and the real differences are not achievable by continuing down the same perfidious model of largely non-productive casino capitalism that has led to the unsustainable trap of unsustainable economic fluff that drives our current economy and makes a mess of the whole world ever widdening the gaps between the haves and the have-nots in an approach to capitalism that does not work because it cannot work. Let the professional class of politicians high-five each other for their politics of gimmicks and slogans while little of real change ever actually happens - Let those of who are interested in politics for reason "Come home to the affirmation that we have a dream. Come home to the conviction that we can move our country forward and come home to the belief that we can seek a newer world,"

[WillyT]

22. Are You Talking About The Immediate Future ???

Or the Inevitable future ?

Because... Inevitably... I think your wrong.

[Azathoth]

24. OWS didn't fail because they were radical and anti-business, they failed because they were a joke

The first part of your second paragraph basically sums it up. OWS is/was a caricature of 60's era hippyism: slogans, drum circles, peeing in public places, all for the purpose of "justice" and "equality" and fighting "the system." While progressives masturbated furiously over the fantasy of an organic revolution of disenfranchised people rising up against the corporate class and whatever else, the average Joe was turning on the TV and watching a bunch of unemployed hippies camping out in the local park. Apart from a handful of reasonable-sounding but wholly amorphous slogans, OWS had no explicit goals or agenda to offer people, no leadership, no spokesmen, no organization or infrastructure, and most importantly, no desire to participate meaningfully in the political process. People watching at home saw a freight train to nowhere that ultimately got itself ushered ignominiously off the public stage when police finally chased it out of the local parks like common vagrants.

We can have the radical vs. moderate debate when a serious and genuinely effective political movement emerges to take up OWS's message. Personally, I think such a movement would be beneficial for the country. Right now, our political debate is between right-wing extremists and centrists. The left side of the isle is almost entirely absent from the discussion; it's so bad the average American now thinks Obama is a "socialist" and that moderately conservative ideas like the insurance mandate are "far-left." The business community has no motivation to compromise in such an environment. They will be a lot readier to cut deals and make concessions and work in good faith with moderates to fix this country's problems when there is a vibrant, populist left-wing movement getting politicians elected to office on a platform of raising the corporate tax rate to 80%.

[coalition_unwilling]

45. OWS failed? Really? What criterion\criteria are you using to assess success or

failure?

[eridani]

52. I'd call giving emergency response training in NY to the same people who peppersprayed them--

--a year ago pretty massive success. Not to mention changing the whole national conversation with the 1% vs 99% meme. And raising millions online to retire medical and student debt.

[AgingAmerican]

99. This sounds like a republican screed

n/t

[Marr]

25. Go join the fucking Republicans if you want to tongue-kiss Wall Street.

Apparently you haven't been listening to anything coming from your left, because we're not about making the "business community fail". Rational regulation is not an attack, but if you feel it is, as I said, there's a whole party already set up for you.

[Blue_In_AK]

26. Not the future I want.

Thank you for your concern.

[Fire Walk With Me]

27. Fox news says OWS is dead. Sigh...and the problems we discuss still have not been addressed.

That should tell you a great deal about "voting" and "leaders" and "government". None of them represent the people and the will of the people.

"Fiscal Cliff" is a lie to force "austerity" which is "robbery continued". Income inequality taken to another astonishing level.

Isn't that Occupy helping people across the East Coast after hurricane Sandy? Doing the Strike Debt Rolling Jubilee? THAT is the model of the future, THAT helps real, actual people NOW. Sick of waiting for "leaders" and obsolete systems to help US.

[NoOneMan]

28. Our future is Climate Change

It cares fuck all about your political orientation

[AgingAmerican]

100. +100000000000000000000000000000000

[ananda]

30. Sorry, but there is no real future there...

... for humanity and many other large life forms.

Our only sustainable future lies in our holistic cooperation not in continued class wars and divisiveness.

[DonCoquixote]

31. and bs like this

is why many of us hate the idea of a Hillary Clinton presidency.

[Fumesucker]

43. Bingo.. n/t

[MrSlayer]

32. Fuck that DLC noise.

Being the party of Ronald Reagan is not what we should be. And we're not anti-business, we're pro-labor. The greedy corporate crumbs that are out destroy unions and destroy working conditions are NOT our friends. Our job is not to be chummy with those bastards but to keep them in line and make sure they treat the people responsible for their success fairly.

At least that's the way it's supposed to be.
Unfortunately, the garbage you describe is the way it is and it's never going back to the philosophy of labor over capital.

[woo me with science]

36. That old Third Way bird doesn't fly anymore. nt

[BarackTheVote]

37. I'm sorry, multinationals and big corporations ARE the enemy--

They have driven mom and pop operations off the business landscape from their ruthless undercutting; they depress wages; they flaunt regulations; they want to be the only voice in political discourse; they want to BLOCK 99.9% of people from achieving the American Dream. What these behemoths desire is nothing less than an American feudal state where everybody but the upper crust are serfs working for slave wages. They resent that every few years, WE have a voice and they do every single thing they can through "citizens united" and lobbyists to seize complete control of our government. They are the enemies of democracy, of the middle class, of everybody who is not their elite captains. If they are allowed to continue to consolidate power, our country, the American ideal, will be OVER.

I'm not worried about them, the economic blowback from putting them in their places. The economy and the business-scape follows Darwin. If an apex predator goes extinct, might suck for a while, but eventually, a dozen other species will start competing to take over that niche, giving Entrepreneurs an opening to claim a spot in the food chain and grow their businesses at a LOCAL level. Eventually, after a few generations, the most successful will become apex predators, and then that generation will have to deal with them. But maintaining democracy is a CONSTANT process of vigilance against the suppressive forces that threaten it.

So, let's create an equitable society. Let's NOT give preferential treatment to companies that have done nothing but maintain their momentum to become what they are. Give openings to the entrepreneurs and CREATE A SECURE MIDDLE CLASS.

There you f*king go! ::Spikes the mic::

[freshwest]

201. +1

[Egalitarian Thug]

38. False equivalencies, lies, and more pointless shit stirring. What a shock. n/t

[nadinbrzezinski]

39. Of course you know occupy is gone

Right?



The rest f this swill deserves zero seconds further.

[HooptieWagon]

40. Fuck the DLC and Third Way.

I'll gladly take their bodies occupying seats real Dems can't win, so the Dems can have a majority...but they shouldn't be dictating the platform.

[BrentWil]

160. There influence is the only reason you do win. NT

[HooptieWagon]

171. "There"? Third Way-ers getting spelling lessons from teabaggers now?

The only way DLC or Third Way can get elected is with votes from liberals, bub. For now that's fine,, when facing a common enemy...but don't get too complacent, we'll kick your asses out as soon as we're done with the pukes.

[Democracyinkind]

41. I so hope that shit stirring will one day become a legitimate business model.

That way, at least you'd might actually end up among the kind of monocle-clad company that you seem to so dearly wish for.

But I could write anything here, a long substanstive rebuttal, a short snarky post - what does it matter? The MO is not about replying, is it....

[Rex]

46. I've noticed the rhetoric is being ramped up for some reason.

[Democracyinkind]

48. Losing my nerves with the hit and run OP's...

[Rex]

49. Some will do anything to keep the status quo

I just laugh at drive-by OPs...they set themselves up imo.

[RandiFan1290]

65. Same as 2010

The same group that lectured us about why Obama and Pelosi needed to keep the tax cuts for the wealthy.

[Rex]

89. Yes, thank you, exact same crowd.

It is a bit tiresome.

[Joe Shlabotnik]

42. unrec

Radical change is happening whether people want to accept it or not. We've exceeded our carrying capacity environmentally and economically and both have occurred because of greed and ignorance. The very last people I'd trust (assuming that corporations are people, my friend) are the cheerleaders of this unsustainable mess.

[coalition_unwilling]

47. Classic Hit-and-Run OP. (Hat tip to WilliamPitt for coining the

phrase). OP doesn't even stick around to defend his thesis. There's another word for that (begins with a 'T'), but using it probably earns one an alert.

[BrentWil]

55. I will defend it...

Just couldn't last night. I will be back, as they say.

[LAGC]

59. He defended himself in this thread, before he self-deleted:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=1919195

OP is transparent as hell.

[Wind Dancer]

187. Disgusting!

It's hard to believe that thread was allowed to stay. I'm feeling sick!

[Waiting For Everyman]

50. Says who?

And besides, business did fine under FDR. People will always make their money. It's a question of whether we let them wreck the rest of society while doing it. Actually, what's good for the grassroots is good for business -- it's happened that way each time we gave it a chance.

[Laelth]

70. +1 n/t

-Laelth

[kickysnana]

51. Bull n/t

[aquart]

53. Can't have a center without a far.

Really, that should be obvious. If only to obtain coordinates.

[xchrom]

54. I think there should be a 'reverse Charlie Crist'

Movement by moderate dems to the republican party.

[RandiFan1290]

56. You are failures

You are the people that brought us Reagan and W. You brought us 9/11 and the War in Iraq. You also helped us get tax cuts for the wealthy that helped to ruin this economy along with deregulation.

You and your right wing buddies are bad for this country.

FOAD

[aandegoons]

57. If that is the future then this country is fucked.

The right wing extremist might as well call victory right now.

[BrentWil]

156. The extremist in the far right scare the business community

As they should. If it was just Wall Street a deal on the fiscal cliff would be done. They created a monster and it is out of control.

[Comrade_McKenzie]

60. The business community should be us, the workers, and not a handful of robber barons... nt

[union_maid]

61. Everything helped

I have lost all tolerance for a left that will throw moderate dems aside while waiting for something more perfect. But it sure seems to me that OWS fueled a whole new level of public discourse on the subject of economic inequality. The movement of wealth upward has been going on for decades, but it took OWS to get it on TV and on the radar of people who don't normally follow political discussion but do vote.

As to demonizing business - well, times have changed since the early 90's and the Democrats were known as anti-business and that was a bad thing. As a matter of practicality, of course Dems in government want American business to succeed. The best Dems want to make it easier for them to succeed if they provide good jobs to Americans and harder if they don't. But let's not forget that the Wall Street community has pretty much demonized itself. It has downsized, "rightsized", outsourced and offshored. It has demanded less and less regulation to the point where a business is hard put to be a responsible corporate citizen and still be competitive. And while all this is going on, corporate profits have soared. It is really, really hard not to hate them.

[tama]

66. What do you win?

Yep, you need all that corporate corruption to win elections, but what do you win by winning election by selling your sole? How are elections "relevant" for e.g. not destroying more of this planet but keeping it livable for our children?

Confusing "focus and discipline" with authoritarian partisanship&correption and leadership cult shows that you have no idea of true meaning of focus and discipline.

[HughBeaumont]

67. "We on the Left"???

The way you practically trip over yourself to defend every "go-along-to-get-along" economic policy of the Turd Way kind of disqualifies you from that category.

Extreme wealth fealty, to the point that they got so rich that the only thing left for them to buy was the government, killed this country's progress. We're not taxing these way lucky bastards enough.

[BrentWil]

68. Do I belong on the right?

If I believe in government providing a safety net, doing limited redistribution of wealth to build a middle class, and believe in sane regulations... Where do I belong?

[HughBeaumont]

69. With posts like this, I kind of wonder myself.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021913499

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002311671

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002312347

http://www.democraticunderground.com/124040402

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002255903

"Economy: The world is globalized. Business can move with ease. In this environment, we have to regulate with the world and ensure our tax polices do not force business out. The best means of taxes is one that is based on higher income people as individuals and that can go across international lines. However, Capitalism and Globalization are here to stay. It is best to figure out the best means to use those forces to make the nation more competitive and to maximize benefits for all people."

Fairness isn't going to be achieved if you think Big Business can self-regulate and they have your best interests in mind.

Fairness isn't going to be achieved in the current zero-sum model of unfair trade the U.S. corporate community embraces.

[BrentWil]

72. Where do I say they self regulate? NT

[nadinbrzezinski]

93. Center right

In most normal political systems.

[BrentWil]

94. What is normal...

Political systems are naturally relative to a society. Since I am in the US and this is a political discussion on the US system, the question should be based on the US system, not so called "normal systems".


Or is this just a means to say...."whaw... He doesn't agree with me.... Whaw, he is a Republican"

[nadinbrzezinski]

95. The US is too narrow and has shifted right, way to the far right...

To the point that Nixon is a liberal (he was all for regulations, exhibit A, EPA) and FDR is a damn commie. So sorry, you are center right. That is what the third way is, center right.

You asked, you got an answer.

I hope the new center right party is formed so DLC'ers and moderate Republicans can have a new home. Because what is going on right now...in the streets...will inevitably pull the US towards social democracy. What, you think the US will remain as you know it? Damn, there is this thing called history, you might have heard of it.

And you think OWS s dead...it is so dead it is leading relief work in the Rockaways. Hell, it s so damn dead they are part of my local progressive coalition including labor, where they were last night, trying to save YOUR SOCIAL SECURITY. You really need to get out more.

[BrentWil]

103. I will stay in the Democratic Party, thank you very much

Not only do I believe in things like same sex marriage, but I also think the social events are better.

[nadinbrzezinski]

105. And...so do moderate repubs

And the country is going through the kind of political shift that a moderate party (like 1852 and the Whigs) is quite likely.

Pick a history book. For the record the GOP were the liberals of both the Whigs and democrats, so this is far from unprecedented.

[BrentWil]

109. I doubt it

While the county has been though serveral evolutions of the two party system, I doubt conditions are ripe today. More then Likly, the GOP will lose some elections because of their tea party problem, they will moderate, the Dems will over reach, and the GOP will be back. That story is far more likely then something like the 1850s and the rise of the GOP.

[nadinbrzezinski]

112. You are still center right

And what is over reach? Personally we need a new deal 2 and the GOP has been trying to destroy the first one.

Here is another clue...globalization has a poison pill to it...it is energy, as in oil dependent...we are on the downward slope of production.

And of course we have climate change, which more than a few in this country refuse to see.

And yes, it could be 1964 all over again, last time they threw the Crazy uncle out (John Birch, courtesy of the Kock). But you really need to pick a history book. In my view the conditions are closer to the rise of the GOP. And quite frankly, this country, when you remove labels, is CENTER LEFT TO LEFT.

[Raksha]

132. Speaking of the Rockaways...

I've been trying to follow the incredible relief work Occupy Sandy has been doing. It's truly impressive, but I keep asking myself "Where is FEMA?" A lot of the volunteers seem to be asking themselves the same thing.

[nadinbrzezinski]

133. FEMA has been working in parallel.

There are a few things FEMA does not do after the initial phase, food, water and shelter. At the same time the volunteers do not get the government loan programs and all of that.

This said, while it worked better than Katrina, FEMA still has a few problems from the bush years.

Of course the ARC is showing a sclerotic organization.

[Raksha]

145. ARC - that stands for American Red Cross, right?

They were terrible during Katrina. A lot of people have had a grudge against them since WWII and refuse to donate to them, although I don't know the backstory. Guess I could google it if I want to take the time.

[nadinbrzezinski]

146. Yes, the American Red Cross

Locally I have seen their disaster services do things that make me shake head. One reason I now carry stuffed toys to fires.

[HughBeaumont]

98. What you call "So-called normal systems" are far fairer to their citizens and their economy.

The U.S. should never be considered an "ideal" when you have 50 million uninsured and 250 million at the mercy of for-profit health insurance (a system I don't see ONE COUNTRY even remotely discussing to adopt).

The U.S. should never be considered a "benchmark" when you have anywhere from 300:1 to 475:1 CEO-to-average worker pay ratio, depending on the year.

The U.S. should never be considered "exemplary" when we have no mandated paid maternity leave, no mandated vacation and harsh life-destroying penalties for union organization attempts.

The U.S. should never be considered "normal" as long as real-dollar inflation-adjusted wages have been stagnant for 33 years while the incomes of the wealthy have vaulted 285% in that same amount of time.

What you're promoting and the economic system you subscribe to has been a one-sided BUG HUNT on workers and their progress. It's not democratic, workers have literally NO say in a corporate knife-throwing show, our health and vitality is almost completely tethered to how gainfully we're employed and that's WRONG.

We can't strike out and voice our opinions without severe beatdowns from the corporation's personal army (the police) . . . incidentally, ever see any police at Tea Party events at all?

Please don't call what the U.S. has "normal". The notion is laughable.

[BrentWil]

101. What's normal is relative to any culture... That's all I said.

I didn't say anything about the US system being better or worse. I said normal is relative.

[nadinbrzezinski]

106. So we all should ignore standard political science

Next I will here that Hitler was a socialist...my, should I faint now?

[BrentWil]

116. I think you are suggesting comparative politics

The political spectrum might be different in the US. In fact, it clearly is. That doesn't mean that my views aren't center-left.


They would be right wing in Finland However, why is that relavent? We are in the US, not Finland.

[nadinbrzezinski]

117. You are still center right

Even for the narrow range in the US. Sorry.

[BrentWil]

119. Well...

If you live in a universe where someone is pro-marriage equality, pro-choice, believes in an expanded safety net and government programs to build a middle class and limited redistribution of wealth is center right in America... Well you aren't living in a reality based world.

[nadinbrzezinski]

120. There are moderate republicans still

Who believe in these things too, not many...and they are still center right. It has to do with your views on business and your idea that the mythical left wants business to fail. Sorry to break this reality to you, the real left doesn't. That is what makes you center right...as well as the few moderate republicans still existing who are socially liberal, see that safety net and LBGT rights, and fiscally conservative.

Brent I am looking at the full package you presented in your OP. you are socially liberal and fiscally conservative. In the real world we call that center right. . Sorry if it hurts. But that is what you are. . This is in the reality based world...sorry.

[BrentWil]

121. It doesn't hurt

My thoughts are mine. Whatever one wants to call them, I don't care. I just think calling then center right with relation to the American political system is silly.

[nadinbrzezinski]

123. But that is where you are

Within the American Political System.

[BrentWil]

126. That's silly. NT

[nadinbrzezinski]

131. Of course it is silly, just a hard core political definition

That has been at work for decades...in the United States.

You might do well to accept where you are, because you ain't fooling the rest of us, you are a third way, center right democrat.

I am a social democrat, see Bernie Sanders for an American example...I happen to vote for democrats because they more closely align with my views, some of the time. The difference is I am aware where I am politically. You are not.

It gets worst, this electoral cycle we got rid of Bilbray. I know the history of the Democrat Scott Peters...I expect him to be a little less bad than the Republican...but I know his history in City Council. It's not pretty to be honest. Like you, he"s a blue dog. Unlike you, he does not run from it. For that I respect him.

I would have a lot more respect for most center right democrats if they at least were willing to accept where they are and be proud of it. Instead we hear this but, but, but I am for the safety net! Well, it is the full packet.

Perhaps you honestly did not realize this. You would not be the first one, to be honest. Most Americans really are not aware of this stuff, and it is by design quite frankly.

[newspeak]

80. hey, wait, i'm still trying to get my head around the "far left"

gee, FDR democrat is far left now days. we need to get with the times where unbalanced trade agreements, little regulated global corporations, mass privatization and more trickle on economics is the new way. and if you don't agree with that you must be far left.

yeah, i really want to cheerlead for those who have become richer, while we've become poorer with those great tax breaks, and i want to cheerlead for those rich corporations, wall street who could give a damn about the people in this country or the infrastructure over their own wallets. and let's all say "hooray, and give us some more please", of stolen pensions, low wages, deregulation (poison and screw us some more). go third way!!!!!!!!!!

[marmar]

71. Your future maybe. Leave me out of dystopia.

[ProSense]

73. Some people are

so transparent.

Could Federal Educational Vouchers Aimed at the Poor and Useable in Public Schools Work?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002312347

Would you buy your way out of bad public schools by sending your child to a private school?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021953969

Jindal voucher overhaul unconstitutionally diverts public funds to private schools, judge rules
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014322479

Pushing the RW agenda is not "our future."

[BrentWil]

159. I don't even have a post in one of those threads. NT

[underoath]

205. Are you sure?

[BrentWil]

214. Yeah...

The thread....


Jindal voucher overhaul unconstitutionally diverts public funds to private schools, judge rules


I don't have a post.

[countryjake]

74. Pinch yourself and squeal and know that this is real...

The incredible success that your preciiiooouuuusssss "business" enjoyed throughout most of the last century was built on one thing and one thing alone...the blood and sweat of a strong united working class. It was Union labor that built what you call a solid "middle class" and enabled that good ole healthy "consumerism" that is the bread and butter of this system.

Well, here's a light-bulb moment for ya, government may have done their damnedest to eradicate those Unions but guess what...the working class is all still right here, we are watching agape as they swindle away every safety-net/right we've ever fought for; we're cringing that the taxes WE have paid into all of our lives get spent on invasions, bombings, occupations, total annihilation in endless imperial quests; and we are literally dying to be able to walk in to see a doctor where we might actually get healed, rather than bled dry for our last red cent. We don't need no stinkin' profits, we need to stand up in solidarity and reclaim our nation from the weasels who've near destroyed it!

I think that this particular post of yours is on a par with that last sick "fantasy" you told us about. I cannot even believe that I've woken up to read this here.

[BrentWil]

158. And working people should be supported so they can join the middle class NT

[JHB]

75. Bookmarking for later

[BrentWil]

157. Okay. nT

[eilen]

77. Is this a joke? You have no idea what OWS is about.

The Tea Party is not in anyway comparable to OWS. For one thing, OWS is not a Party. They do not endorse candidates. There is a difference between having a party and being one. OWS is a populist movement. If you don't know what kind of movement or where the movement is going, perhaps you have not attended a meeting or bothered to read anything. You have totally misinterpreted the purpose of the Occupy encampments. Perhaps you rely too much on the news media. This might be a shocker but the corporations that own the news media have an agenda. You reference Ghandi and Martin Luther King. OWS does not need a figurehead or hero.


I know the Democrats like to talk about their big tent, however, there is a true difference between being the party for business/owners or the party for labor/workers. Before you seal the deal with "American business", why don't you just tell us exactly what you mean by the term "American Business"? There is already a party that champions the cause of big business, and it starts with an R.

[BrentWil]

79. They are the same in that the tea party helps us more the the GOP

And OWS helped the GOP more then it helped us.

[BarackTheVote]

163. Total BS.

"We are the 99%" morphed into the oh so effective "We are the 47%" and Mitt Romney was CRUSHED. Romney was destroyed because people recognized him as the embodiment of the problem festering in the board rooms of American Big Business, and far fewer people would have recognized him as THE ENEMY if not for OWS. OWS represented people waking the f*ck up, and I do not believe they'll go back to sleep, especially with the Tea Partiers screaming their corporatist bullshit at the top of their lungs and dragging our entire country--hell, our entire WORLD--down in the process!

[BrentWil]

168. We won by 3 percent because Obama ran an...

Extremely good campaign, Romney sucked and we grinded out a victory on key states. Given the demographics, I rather be us then them. However, this wasn't 1980, 1984, or 1988.

[BarackTheVote]

181. Nice RW talking points you got there, bro.

[randome]

182. Romney was not crushed. Look at the numbers.

I disagree that OWS benefited the GOP. I think they had a marginal effect for Democrats. (Not trying to hijack this thread.)

But Romney certainly was not CRUSHED.

[BarackTheVote]

196. Given that the M$M was cheer leading RMoney

Given that Big Business pumped hundreds of millions of dollars into his campaign; that they had Gallup in their back pocket proclaiming that RMoney would win with a landslide 7% victory, with voter suppression, and the deck massively stacked against Obama by all conventional knowledge--given all that, I'd say Obama crushed it.

[Fire Walk With Me]

170. You obviously either know nothing about OWS or are poking fun. OWS is =non-partisan=

and supports no politician or political party. Mostly because the majority of them do not support the people of this country, at least at the upper levels where decisions are being made and lobbyists are behind most of the decisions.

Income inequality has not changed. Workers rights are being destroyed. Civil rights are being destroyed. Banks have our money and have neither been punished nor regulated. The blatantly illegal foreclosure machine rolls ever onward. Some $2 billion was spent on this election cycle thanks to Citizens United.

Washington does nothing. Nothing. It is up to the people. Research "Occupy Sandy" and "Rolling Jubilee" for people-powered models of mutual aid and elimination of personal debt utilizing the same system keeping us in debt. WE are the change for which we've been waiting. No one is going to give it to us.

[truebluegreen]

81. I disagree.

We need a lot more than "moderate" reforms to deal with the problems we have.

Sure, capitalism is out of control, in a cancer phase, here and around the world. Decades ago, in a roughly similar situation FDR saved capitalism in this country by installing safety valves in the system. "Everybody" got a piece of the pie. Stability and growth ensued. The Good Old Days!

But the situation now has some added elements. Planet-wide population growth. The looming disaster of global climate change. Shrinking resources.

IMHO, we can't just patch up or re-tool the current system, we need a new one...because capitalism requires constant growth to function and we, as a planet, Can't Support That.

[BrentWil]

82. Sure we can

The market still functions if carbon is more expensive. The developed world is starting to lose population, not gain it.

[truebluegreen]

85. I wasn't just talking about carbon, or just about the developed world.

And to probably misquote a favorite historian, regarding the DLC and Third Way and that ilk, "I admire you for your innocence but do not envy you your folly."

We not only have to establish a sustainable system, we have to clean up the mess we've created already. That means, among other things, turning corporations into responsible citizens, when by definition they are a bunch of sociopaths. That is going to involve a lot more than more expensive carbon. And it has to happen very quickly.

I'm not very hopeful, but Occupy gave me a little.

[BarackTheVote]

164. Markets only function if there is more than one seller

consolidation leads to gouging, disenfranchisement, and ultimately the complete servitude of the masses. This is what is happening thanks to deregulation and our governments complete dereliction in breaking up the monopolies that are taking over our country industry by industry. The Gatekeepers are all bought and paid for, but you can still open your eyes and see: we are on the steep slope to feudalism if something drastic doesn't occur ASAP.

[eShirl]

83. "The business world" needs to stop usurping political power and undermining the country.

the country a.k.a. We The (Human) People

[Bluenorthwest]

86. Where is the Third Way or 'moderate' counterpart to Occupy Sandy?

It is somewhere between the Mitt Method 'let them eat sand' and the actual sterling efforts of Occupy Sandy. In some mysterious center area, where no actions are taken in order to maintain a feeling of alliance with those who embrace the Mitt Method.
http://interoccupy.net/occupysandy/

Show me the results of the 'moderate's' repsonse to Sandy, or to anything. What do 'moderates' as a group organize and acheive? Do they feed and rescue people in peril after disasters? Occupy does.
And no one wants business to fail, what a silly bit of rhetoric that is. People want ethical businesses working on a level playing field, business that adds to society not business that sucks society dry. The hyperblole is most certainly not a 'moderate' discussion modality. It is in fact a hallmark of the right wing's methods of discussion.

[BrentWil]

155. Occupy Sandy is amazing

The most amazing part of that was the lack of waste. Many give to charity and many work for good causes. However, the good occupy sandy did is undeniable.

[cprise]

87. What you hold as good is antithetical to the DLC that I know.

You seem to have your terms and/or political history confused and remind me of Democrats who refuse to believe that Bill Clinton repealed Glass-Steagal (incidentally, the kind of people who barrel around the city in large SUVs and devote most of their free time to the Catholic Church-- but I digress).

Martin Luther King advocated socialism in his final few months before he was murdered. Socialists dominate the Left in most developed countries where they are not often considered "far left": Social democracies and mixed-economy countries. It does not make good sense to demonize a fictitious "far left", knowing what that usually encompasses, but we have paid dearly because Democrats like you- in echoing today's thoroughly rotten corporate culture -made it their business to do so.

Much of the business community, the corporate aristocrats who depend on this (and I dare you to watch it all), should be out of business or behind bars. They are dangerous psychopaths. If you prefer to be their security blanket and 'natural ally' by trashing movements like OWS it is your right, but do not expect history to be kind.

[BrentWil]

154. History is kindest to the pragmatic that moves in the right direction. NT

[BarackTheVote]

166. Letting multinationals run rampant over the 99%

is NOT pragmatic.

[Fire Walk With Me]

88. If you're standing up for fairness and equality of opportunity, we've got your back. #OWS

Occupy Wall Street ?@OccupyWallStNYC

If you're standing up for fairness and equality of opportunity, we've got your back. #OWS

[Rex]

90. Certain people still fear the effects of OWS

and as you know, people always mock what they fear.

[BrentWil]

153. Well thanks

Occupy Sandy was amazing...

[Bluenorthwest]

91. Dear OP, still waiting to hear all about the Thrid Way Moderate's program to help

after Sandy. If Occupy is so worthless and they are so moderate and wonderful, clearly they'd out do Occupy in all good things. So share with us the great things the 'moderate' community has gotten done after the storm. If you don't have any equal to what Occupy did, you should apologize for this bullshit OP. Then you should go organize your 'moderate' fellows to accomplish something other than taking swipes at those who are not conservative enough to please you and your peers..

[AgingAmerican]

96. You can be left of center and not be FAR LEFT

"OWS was quickly demonized as radicals" Um, by whom? The Republicans?

The republicans demonize Obama as a 'radical.' I wouldn't put much weight in that.

[BrentWil]

152. I don't

Swung voters do

[AgingAmerican]

178. Hogwash

That's a myth, that anything left of center is perceived as 'extreme'. Third way, blue dog, RW tripe.

[mmonk]

97. Being "moderate" is why we are in the situation we are in economically.

What is considered "moderate" today is very conservative when compared to the past. "Far left" today was just considered economics in the past.

[BrentWil]

151. And the 1930s are very liberal when compared to 1910...

We live today, not yesterday

[NYC Liberal]

102. How can the future be "DLC" when the DLC doesn't exist?

[sabrina 1]

111. The DLC is now The Third Way. It very much exists. They changed their

name when they realized how unpopular they had become with Democrats.

[NYC Liberal]

114. The DLC didn't change its name; it disbanded around the same time the RLC did.

[sabrina 1]

115. It morphed. But same policies and many of the same people.

Regardless, it is now part of the Dem Party and currently promoting cutting benefits for the most vulnerable Americans with the Big Republican lie that these programs were part of the cause of the defiict, right on their website.

[BrentWil]

150. That is true

But thought it was the most known group to make my point, even if they went away.

[bowens43]

104. we should move to position our party as the moderate party? No thanks.

nothing more than DLC corporate masturbation....not interested.

We need to reel in capitalism.....we need to severely limit the amount of profit that the 'share holders' can expect to receive. We need to place absolute limits on the amount money any corporation or any individual can amass.

[davidn3600]

110. The Democratic leadership are ALL capitalists

I keep saying this...we do not have a far-left party in America. The Democrats are center-left and the Republicans are far-right. A far-left party does not exist.

[Teamster Jeff]

113. You could have made your point without bashing OWS

If OWS is not relevant I believe you wouldn't feel the need to even comment on it.

Also, who on the left wants American business to fail?

[RagAss]

127. There would be no fucking center-left if there was no far-left.

Logic.

[arcane1]

129. Much depends on how one definies "business community"

That vague term could refer to the mom-&-pop market down the street from me, and it can also refer to Goldman Sachs.

[patrice]

130. OWS isn't Far Left. It includes the Far Left. You've heard of Horizontal Empowerment? nt

[warrprayer]

135. speak for yourself n/t

[closeupready]

136. DLC's strategy is, 'if they'll move right, make em move righter.'

And that's exactly what you are trying to do here.

We are liberal country, and the future is the Democratic Party and it's policies - solidly liberal.

If that bothers you, join the Republican Party instead.

[BrentWil]

137. The future is a Democratic Party that is pragmatic or

A return of the GOP over time.

[closeupready]

161. Politics swings like a pendullum - that's well-known.

So yes, things swing right, and then left, and then right again.

We're moving left again, thank God. One day, things will move right, but I hope it's not for a very, very, very long time.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

138. "Our future is center-left...": 2200 views, 9 recs

1 in every 244 viewers of this thread agree with you enough to have recommended the thread.

Best of luck to you.

[Raksha]

139. Interesting numbers, and actually a very hopeful sign

for the future of the real left, the true progressive movement--Occupy included, of course.

2200 page views, 9 recs.

Repeating the numbers just because they sound so good, and make me so hopeful.

[BrentWil]

140. Well...

DU isn't the Democratic Party. Also, that would be views versus rec. A user can have multiple views on one thread.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

148. point taken, r.e. multiple views

Thank you.

[BrentWil]

149. Your welcome NT

[Marrah_G]

162. Bleh

[TheKentuckian]

167. If you insist on spouting that shit could you at least throw a picture of

Erin Andrews or Meghan Kelly up in your signature and give me the weather and scores?

Your production values suck, give us some graphics at least.

[David__77]

169. No, the labor movements are the "natural organizations to work with" for progressives.

Labor movements are not innately anti-capitalist; in fact, labor has saved capitalism from itself.

[BrentWil]

172. Labor and business are not natural enemies NT

[Fumesucker]

173. !

OK, my dogs are really concerned but I can breathe again.

That's the funniest thing I've heard in ages, I'm impressed at your ability to say remarkably ridiculous things with a straight face.

[BrentWil]

174. They aren't

They have something that should be a very strong common interest.

[Fumesucker]

175. Man is not a rational animal, man is an animal that rationalizes

That's where you go wrong, you think people are rational and make decisions that are rational for the most part.

The older I get the more convinced I become that what drives more human behavior than any other single thing is tribalism. For today's business tribe acknowledging the humanity of their employees is seen by others of their tribe as a betrayal. It is a betrayal of a carefully constructed zeitgeist that even a great many of the employees themselves even have bought into.

Whereas only a few of the employee tribe even recognize they're in a fucking tribe, they're too busy watching stories lauding the business tribe on the business tribes propaganda dissemination device for which the oblivious employee tribe members are paying a noticeable fraction of their income.

[BrentWil]

193. That is why I used the term "natural"

They may be enemies at times, but they have something that they share in common. They aren't natural enemies because they have a shared interest.

[HughBeaumont]

176. Tell that to "business".

When the "job creators" meet behind closed doors, they do anything BUT "create jobs". Anyone with a high-school understanding of business knows that, which is why I don't see why idiots like Boehner and McConnell and Luntz continue to insult our intelligence with such an easily-debunked canard.

We're nothing but a barely-useful piece of "cost" to an employer . . . discarded like common trash as they see fit or if their quarterly numbers aren't up to snuff.

[BrentWil]

194. Middle class demand creates jobs, really..

No business, rather large or small, hires a person unless they are forced to by need or they think they will grow and need the person.

[markpkessinger]

189. As far as business is concerned . . .

Labor is nothing more than a consumable resource, a necessary input, which should be obtained as cheaply as possible so as to maximize profits. Spare us the "Lion shall lie down with the lamb" bullshit.

[BrentWil]

195. That is largely correct

That is why there is a role for government

[David__77]

188. I did not say. Labor should lead capital in an alliance.

But never the other way around. The labor movement consciously has humanity's interest at the forefront. There's room for the industrial capitalist and the entrepreneur that isn't attempting to loot the real economy and engage in speculative activities.

[deutsey]

177. Gosh, thanks for clearing that up for us

[kath]

180. FUCK the DLC.

Or whatever those assholes are calling themselves these days.

[sabrina 1]

185. Lol, probably not that much. Or they would get better representation.

[markpkessinger]

186. Balderdash!

You have fallen into the very trap the GOP has laid for you, by accepting the spin that the current mid-point between the two parties is the political "center" where "moderation" abounds. I'm not sure how old you are, but I'm guessing you are under 45. The reason I say that is that most of us who are over 45 are aware of the rightward ideological shift both parties have taken in recent decades. We know that the center of the American political spectrum is NOT what happens to be the current ideological midpoint between the two parties. We have a Republican party that has not only moved to the right, it has gone off the rightmost edge of the Earth into batshit crazy radical extremism, and a Democratic Party that occupies ideological turf on which moderate and liberal Republicans of 40 years ago would feel perfectly at home. In other words, we now have a center-right party, and a radical right party. The ideological midpoint between center-right and extreme radical, batshit crazyland is most certainly NOT a point of "moderation" by any stretch of the imagination. No, the midpoint between center right and extreme radical right is -- wait for it -- FAR RIGHT.

In response, the Democratic Party, for its part, should have vigorously held and defended its historic ideological ground as the voice of labor, the poor and minorities of all types. Instead, having fallen under the sway of DLC/Third Way types, sold much of the party on the idea that every time we lose an election to Republicans, that means we should move further in the direction of Republicans. Well, we tried that. As the GOP got more and more insane, Democrats began adopting positions that had previously been considered right-wing, conservative positions. Did it make the party more popular with the electorate? No. It resulted in much of the electorate coming to see Democrats (and not unjustifiably) as a bunch of spineless weasels who talk a good populist game but who, in the end, are just as beholden to corporate paymasters as the GOP -- the only difference in their eyes being that Democrats whine about it more. The country elected President Obama wanting and expecting a departure from that kind of spineless accommodationism. I submit that many of the difficulties with public opinion that President Obama experienced in the first 2-3 years of his first term resulted from a perception that he was unwilling to fight for many ot the things he claimed to support during the 2008 campaign. Now, that may or may not have been an entirely fair criticism, but it was how it was perceived by many. And the President's poll numbers consistently rose whenever he appeared to be returning to his more populist positions and appeared ready to fight for them.

The late Senator Ted Kennedy saw this coming back in 1995, in an address to the National Press Club in which he excoriated many of his Democratic colleagues for "sheepishly acquiescing to GOP efforts to cut the social safety net." As Kennedy said:

"Sometimes the task of a great political party is to face the tide, not just ride with it, and to turn it again in the direction of our deepest convictions. . . . If Democrats run for cover, if we become pale carbon copies of the opposition and try to act like Republicans, we will lose, and deserve to lose."

You are correct that many voters simply see Democrats as the "lesser of two evils." But if you can see that, I don't understand how you can fail to see that what you are calling for is a recipe for maintaining that less than optimal public image.

Another aspect of your post with which I must take serious issue -- and it runs throughout your post -- is the way you repeatedly posit some sort of enmity between the left and business. The left (at least in this country) has never been the "enemy of business," as you suggest. The left does not, as you dishonestly suggest, want to see the business community fail, nor does it have a problem with business owners/shareholders reaping a reasonable profit. (That entire line of argument, frankly, amounts to little more than a Fox News talking point.) What the left does want, however, is for businesses to fairly compensate their employees (i.e., at a level where a person working a full time job can actually afford to feed, clothe and shelter himself/herself, and with benefits that enable that person to receive medical care when needed and to retire with a measure of dignity). The left does want businesses to provide clean, safe working conditions for their employees. The left does want a robust regulatory structure when it comes to the nation's food and drug supplies, and vigorous regulatory oversight of the financial sector. The left wants businesses to succeed, but to do so in a manner that does not despoil the environment and does not endanger people's health. But here's the thing about the business community: they're greedy fuckers. They'll take as much and more as anybody will allow them to. And as soon as anybody proposes anything that might force them to spend an extra dollar or two, they'll howl at the moon over the injustice of it all. But you know what? If we don't give in to their howling, eventually they'll stop howling and get back to their businesses. And lo and behold, they will discover that even with all those "burdensome regulations" imposed on them by those evil left wingers, they are still able to make a decent profit.

Finally, as for what "the American people want," the American people, by and large, are so confused by the disinformation that emanates from the right-wing propaganda machine that they aren't really sure what they want. What they do know is that Washington has ceased to work for them. They do know that when push comes to shove, they have been shafted by both parties in recent decades (slightly less often by Democrats, but since the Democratic Party purports to be on their side and then still throws their interests under the bus in favor of corporate interests, it is a more bitter pill to swallow when the betrayal comes at the hands of Democrats).

[BrentWil]

192. Obama is a Republican from the 1960s. So what?

I agree. The spectrum has shifted to the right. By the standards of the 1930s to 1960s, Obama is a center right president. So what? We ain't living in the 1930s and today's political center is today's political center.

I would note that this is only a shift on economics rightward.

[DirkGently]

197. Problem is that center left is now CALLED far left.

All the things those called "far left" today in America are fighting for are center-left or just flat moderate. Universal healthcare. Progressive tax rates that work. Reproductive rights for women. Fair labor practices.

NONE of this is radical left or far left.

So let's be clear. "Our future" is NOT slightly less heinous conservative bullshit like cutting our already modest social programs or slowing the insane growth of military spending.

Fuck that future. If we want something resembling sanity, we need to take a long, hard, sharp left turn to even get within sight of "the center."

[Panasonic]

198. FUCK DLC

NO MORE THIRD WAYERS.

CONSIDER YOURSELF WARNED

[BrentWil]

199. Is that some sort of threat?

[DevonRex]

203. You don't get to claim Obama or even Bill Clinton

to make your screed more palatable. We are moving LEFT. More towards socialism than ever. More towards Labor than we have in fucking decades.

You seem to think you can drop a name and you're in. Bull fucking shit. We remember your rape thread. You posted a Third Way thread tonight. This isn't working out. It's not us. It's you.

[octothorpe]

204. Not to be an ass, but the poor spelling made me give up reading your post.

I highly recommend looking up the differences between then/than, they're/there/their at the very least. I don't mean this as an insult or attack either. I know i appreciate it when people point these things out to me.

[BrentWil]

208. I know the difference

However my spelling is sloppy. I should care more and read it over.

Part of it is posting mostly on a mobile device.

[Chan790]

206. The DLC needs to fuck off.

With extreme prejudice, taking the Third Way with them. Corporatism is the enemy of liberty, its acolytes the enemy of the people. Capitalism is only acceptable when combined with syndicalism and collectivism.

[lunasun]

207. I think I am going to hurl

reading this OP made me sick to my stomach...who ever said American business is the enemy of the left????????????????????

[renie408]

211. The OP did...right up there /\

Duh.

We on the left are not amused.

[renie408]

209. What do you mean 'we', pale face?

My father used to have this joke that he loved that he told all the time.

The Lone Ranger and Tonto have been cornered up in a blind canyon by a mob of angry Indians (the story doesn't work as well if you say 'Native Americans'). They have exhausted their supply of bullets and their enemies are closing in.

The Lone Ranger turns to Tonto and says, "My trusted friend, it has been an honor riding with you, but we are in deep trouble and we have come to our end."

Tonto looks back at the Lone Ranger and says, "What do you mean 'we', pale face?"


You keep saying 'we', but the 'we' you are referring to isn't the 'we' here. You are NOT on the Left. You are, if anything, center right. As brilliantly pointed out in another thread, in 1976 you would have been hard right.

And yeah, the Republican party IS dominated by the Tea Party (though less so every day). Which is what is KILLING THEM. Why would we want to head more their way??

You say that OWS is a failed movement. Has it occurred to you that before OWS NOBODY talked about inequality? Has it occurred to you that the TEA PARTY is the TRULY failed movement? Yeah, they got some guys elected, but the base of their platform and the root of what they stand for is now becoming vilified in this country while the roots set down by OWS are growing.

No, that hasn't occurred to you. It hasn't occurred to you because you are so busy coming up with ways to appease the right (of which you are a member) that you haven't really been paying attention.