Bernie: the Ego Continues. Sad for Him. Sad for Us.

[Iamaartist]

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/05/17/1527238/-Bernie-the-Ego-Continues-Sad-for-Him-Sad-for-Us

Won’t be the nominee but continues fighting for the sake of the ideology.

Or: Won’t be the nominee but continues fighting because he’ll be to old to run again in four years and is intoxicated by the crowds and attention.

Not for superdelegates when they're for Hillary: it’s not a fair system, but for superdelegates if they switch to him… (So: How many fanatics does it take to screw in a light bulb? Two. One to steal the bulb, etc.)

When asked if caucuses are fair even if they’re less democratic, he said, “I think people should be forced to participate more vigorously in our democracy.” Meaning, for those who have to work during caucuses, too bad…

All the words of a politician…

Wants a revolution but didn’t price it out, didn’t consider how he’d get it through Congress. Those are just details and he’s clearly not a detail guy.

The thing is Bernie, no one told you: you can’t get a country, or a party, to change by putting a gun to their heads.

But in “democratic socialist”, the “democratic” obviously doesn’t derive from democracy. Or from Democratic Party.

The party needs a revolution, you say, though you never joined, and the majority of party members don’t chose you.

It’s easy to destroy things. Try to create sometime.

And by the way, we who voted for Hillary would expect her, with the most votes and the most pledged delegates, to win.

[Iamaartist]

1. We are with you Hillary today good or bad we stand behind you....

[Koinos]

2. K & R

From the very beginning, Bernie and his disciples showed their authoritarian and anti-democratic personality traits. It is their way or the highway. Authoritarians deal in absolutes and have no tolerance for differing points of view. They don't believe in the give and take of persuasive dialogue. They insist on bullying others into seeing things their way. Suppression of and disregard for the unique importance and liberty of others is directly opposed to the spirit and letter of democracy.

[Iamaartist]

3. Well said statement ,thank-you K&R.....

L☮o☮v☮e☮ & p☮e☮a☮c☮e

[Koinos]

6. Thank you for posting the excellent article! It gave me something to think about.

Bernie Sanders has been trying to force the Democratic party to make him their nominee, despite the fact that he has accumulated fewer votes and fewer delegates. He and his unfortunate followers are about to find out what democracy is all about. It is not about rule by a minority faction. It is about majority rule, with protection for minority rights. There is nothing "democratic," about Bernie's so-called "democratic socialism." It is "authoritarian socialism," pure and simple. It would compel the majority to believe and act in accordance with a minority that claims to know better than the majority what is best for them. Threats and compulsion are authoritarian, not democratic, methods. Bernie and his followers together lack the self-reflection to recognize the danger that their absolutist positions pose to a genuinely democratic way of life.

Democracy, as a way of life and as a political regime, is a hard thing to achieve and even harder to maintain. There is something about human beings that longs for the easy way, for simple answers, for command and obey authoritarian structures. It gets tiring for us to try to figure things out for ourselves and make our own decisions. Following an authoritarian leader seems more comforting. Believing as we are told to believe eliminates the struggle of "yes and no," of debate within ourselves, of thinking for ourselves. That is why declining democracies tend to turn into authoritarian regimes. Confused people turn to strong leaders with simple answers for everything. Nuance is disquieting and inconvenient. Finally, authoritarianism has nothing to do with "left wing" or "right wing." It can sprout from any ideology. It is an attitude, not a list of beliefs or positions.

[SharonClark]

9. Well said!

[DemonGoddess]

13. +1000!

Great post!

[Iamaartist]

18. You Are right....we live in America...

This not Europe...or some other country who has socialism government....I know his parents where from Europe so was my grandmother.We have been to Spain to see how their government works,we had a foreign Exchange student for whole year staying with us we learn the difference.
I truly don't think it will work here,or his ideas...just my opinion though...


Socialism is a socioeconomic philosophy which has failed everywhere it has been tried, yet for decades has been slowly and steadily creeping into American society. Many contemporary Americans, including some prominent and high-level politicians, hold socialist views and continually press for the implementation of socialist principals and programs in the United States. Socialism is bad for America because it results in large, intrusive and controlling government that diminishes the role and value of individual citizens; it is largely based on “false compassion” that promotes victimhood and big government solutions; and it offers a false hope of utopian brotherhood and equality, resulting in the loss of freedom and the rise of governmental tyranny.

[Koinos]

21. Thanks for your excellent statements!

Socialism, like capitalism, is an economic structure or theory. Democracy, on the other hand, is a human or social arrangement, a way of life, or an attitude. Its leading ideals are liberty, equality, and fraternity. Its methods include joint striving for individual and social fulfillment.

Capitalism or socialism, whatever their respective merits as economic theories, can be governed by democratic or authoritarian principles.

Even corporations, whose purpose is profit for shareholders or owners, can benefit from democratic methods where individual opinions of workers are respected and solicited by management.

Many corporations, however, tend to be authoritarian or "hierarchical" in structure. Management commands, and workers obey. Management owns the assets, so management is always right.

On the other hand, socialist economics can be subservient to principles of freedom, equality, and cooperation which characterize democracy. People can willingly or freely embrace socialist methods of using wealth.

Or socialist economics can be imposed by authoritarian "masters" on the masses "for their own good." In that case, principles of democracy are violated for the sake of greater efficiency and order with regard to distribution of wealth.

In theory, socialism should promote democracy; and capitalism tends to favor authoritarian systems of command and obey.

In fact, genuine instances of democracy can be found coexisting with a variety of economic or mixed economic frameworks; and authoritarianism can appear in a variety of economic or mixed economic frameworks.

The problem is one of people and their attitudes -- whether they prefer to boss others around and be bossed by others or whether they prefer to work side by side with others as equals who think and decide for themselves.

The key is not our economic structures or social arrangements. It is how we arrive at them -- by democratic choice or by authoritarian imposition.

[Koinos]

17. I need to quit, but here's a little bit more. I hope it is of some use.

In a democracy, people have the right to be wrong. Consistent with this right is their obligation to keep an open mind and to rethink their views in the light of new evidence. It is also their duty to listen to what others have to say and to take them and their points of view seriously. In a spirit of respect for all individuals as equally important, people endeavor to educate themselves and others through the give and take of friendly dialogue, including appeal to facts and use of logic. People may not agree or have the same ideas in common; but, in a democracy, regard for others transcends being “right” or “wrong.” Democracy, as an attitude and way of life, thrives on co-humanity or social cooperation. We are not lists of positions or sets of ideas or ideologies. We are people working together in a common search for better ways of thinking and acting. We acknowledge in all humility our individual helplessness and limited knowledge, and we embrace the absolute necessity and genuine joy of working together to achieve common goals and wisdom.

The authoritarian mindset does not like sharing, cooperation, or dialogue. Even if it claims to “value” these ideals, it contradicts itself in practice by commanding others to accept these “values,” without evidence or argument, but simply because those who know better have enshrined them. Authoritarians use “arguments from authority” to justify everything and anything. It is true because “so and so” has said it. The one in charge is always right. Facts are reconfigured to justify this “truth.” Logic and fallacies are used together in creative ways. Ad hominem arguments are used both to end discussion and to discredit those who might respectfully disagree. The point is that even “humanistic” or “progressive” values can be forced on others by individuals who are not themselves humane, cooperative, or social by temperament or habit. Authoritarians are essentially anti-social, because they simply do not accept the principle that the best way to know more and to know better is to engage in the normal give and take of friendly dialogue, where disagreement plays as great a role as agreement. They are intolerant of dissent by others, despite the fact that their own statements may contradict themselves from one day to another. They disagree internally with themselves, but they cannot accept disagreement from others, even if those others happen to be allies or friends.

[Iamaartist]

20. Wow thank-you for your time...that surely helps and says it all...

Hopefully people will read this post and learn from it also..to bad BS supporters don't understand...

thank-you again...

[Koinos]

22. I look forward to the day when we can speak freely everywhere in DU, not just this group.

Authoritarian suppression and anger gets in the way of agreement, disagreement, and dialogue among well-meaning individuals and friends.

[pandr32]

25. I completely agree

...but their "views" are skewed. The things they believe about Hillary Clinton, her experience, her agenda, her allegiances, her support (it is mostly from individuals), her character, and her impending indictment (there isn't one)--are fallacious.
Bernie-based authoritarians may not tolerate "differing points of view" but in Bernie's case, his authoritarian supporters are convinced of things that are false--including what they believe Bernie can and will do if elected. No wonder they are getting nowhere trying to convince (bully) Clinton supporters. They are instead creating a chasm.

[liberal N proud]

4. BS is embarrassing himself

And the BSers are proving they are not ready for prime-time politics

[Iamaartist]

5. True...

I think this short article sums it up....nice

[brer cat]

7. Bernie seems remarkably immature.

Even though he eskewed the party until it served his purpose for this campaign, you would think he learned something about how the parties operate. He and many of his supporters need to grow up before they join the adult table.

[Iamaartist]

10. I agree....

Also he just likes the attention his getting and if he wins both states today. his ego will grow even its about MATH which he doesn't seem to understand ,how the Dem party system works

[tanyev]

8. Did he ever issue a statement after the Nevada convention?

I googled, and all I can find is the statement he issued beforehand. I haven't seen anything on DU about a post-convention statement, but I do have a hella lot of people on ignore.

[NurseJackie]

12. He won't condemn it outright. He'll just passively say that it's not what he "condones"…

... and then make excuses for the perpetrators by blaming "the system" and "the oligarchs" and "the establishment" blah blah blah. Same-old, same-old that we've already heard a thousand times before.

[pandr32]

27. Yes, a pretty mealy-mouthed response

No way do his supporters interpret anything he doesn't condone as applying to them.

[NurseJackie]

11. Excellent. Thank you for sharing this!

[Iamaartist]

15. Your welcome ,,kinda sums it up.....

[BootinUp]

14. This is the only way it COULD have played out. Its just Bernie. nt

[Iamaartist]

16. Thats right..we heard it all, from him....the articles sums it up pretty good....

[Thinkingabout]

19. We the people have spoken, by a count of over three million votes, they can not and will not

take this away from Hillary, she is the most qualified, we will not be denied.

[Iamaartist]

24. Well said also ...thank-you Thinkingabout

We fought hard for our democratic freedom nobody can just come in and just turn the country upside down and expect it to work...

[kstewart33]

23. Great post.

I think Bernie stays in to fight for the sake of his ideology.

Like most ideologues, he doesn't see beyond his ideology and lacks the ability to compromise. Ideologues don't compromise. Their principles and objectives are the best, so why should they?

[Iamaartist]

26. Thank you to.... I agree with that also...

The short article sums it up nicely......

[DrDan]

28. 1 senate endorsement - says a lot about his willingness to compromise

And work with others

[BlueCaliDem]

29. “I think people should be forced to participate more vigorously in our democracy.” Forced??

People should be forced to participate more vigorously in our democracy?? That's not what happens in a democracy. That's what happens in a totalitarian society. Freudian slip?

Also, here's a thought: perhaps the Democratic Party should make a deal with Sanders on how to choose our Democratic nominee for the G.E.? Since he wants to open the elections to everyone and their uncle (and I'm presuming here, Republicans as well), perhaps the Dem Party delegates and superdelegates should choose the Dem Party nominee from now on? it's less expensive and we'll hear far less whining from "independents" who want to come in and choose the nominee for us.

I trust Democratic delegates far more than "independents".

[Koinos]

30. “I think people should be forced to participate more vigorously in our democracy.”

That quote says it all about Bernie's authoritarian tendencies.

We should also be "forced" to make him the nominee.

Do Bernie and his followers ever think about what they say and how they say it?

Bullying is inherently anti-democratic. What about that do they not understand?

[otohara]

31. His Remark on Caucuses

makes me ill.
Was thinking this last caucus might be my last due to age and worsening disability issues.

FU Bernard

[Iamaartist]

32. LOL