Reply #21: I define a revolution as a dramatic change in the fundemental structure [View All]

[K-W]

of a system. The Dean movement was IMAGINED by many invovled as being a revolution. Certainly it was a change, but calling it a revolution is downright silly. If the world is so hopeless that the Dean movement is as radical a change as we can expect, it is time to give up all hope.

Dean is, was, and always shall be a moderate democrat. He is not a revolutionary. His platform was not revolutionary. He was not calling for revolutionary change. If he wins, his campaign will have been interesting and a change, but not a revolution. If he wins he will act like a moderate liberal in office and certainly not shift any paradigms.

Alot of people who wanted a revolution, it seems you are included here, latched on the the small difference in method of his campaign and projected your ideals on him. Those people gave his campaign a revolutionary feel, but you cant base a revolution on someone who isnt looking to do much changing. The kind of change he was trying to make is a change, but it isnt big. In the end all he was campainging for was a shift within the power structure of the democratic party. I expect far more from a revolution.