Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Newsvine
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiMost Americans, and most Democrats want an end to war. Most Americans favor impeachment, and when alternatives are described to them, most favor a single-payer health care system on the French or Canadian model. When Republicans captured the House and Senate in the third year of Bill Clinton's administration the media declared the president "irrelevant". Democrats won the House and Senate in 2006. Why can't Democratic leaders do what Democratic voters elected them to?
The general problem facing Democratic party leaders can be summed up this way.
How do we get elected one more time without giving Democratic voters any of what they want? How do we get elected without ending the war and the policies which led to it, without impeaching Cheney and Bush, without delivering health care? How do we run a woman presidential candidate who's not quite pro-choice, or a black one who's not really not all that committed to addressing issues like the nation's policies of black mass incarceration?
Unfortunately, they seem to have it all figured it out.
After more than five years of lies and a million dead Iraqis, most Americans are ready to seefather and childiraqi father and child the troops brought home. But Democratic House and Senate leaders, along with Democratic presidential candidates, except Mike Gravel and Dennis Kucinich, have cynically decided to let the war continue through the rest of George Bush's term in office, to give them something to shadowbox with, proposing ineffectual time lines, irrelevant benchmarks and gimmicks like "more rest for the troops".
Corporate media obligingly depict this as real, if ineffectual opposition to the war in Iraq, while continuing to promote the so-called "war on terror" that will lead to more Iraqs in Africa, Latin America and elsewhere.
Though Democratic voters overwhelmingly favor impeachment of Cheney and Bush, as do a majority of Americans, party leaders want no part of this either. Even Detroit's John Conyers, who sponsored impeachment bills last year when he was in the minority, and is now chair of the powerful House Judiciary Committee, refuses to do so this year, he reaffirmed to more than 300 disappointed citizens at his office on Monday. Shortly after that announcement, 30 of them, including Rev. Lennox Yearwood were arrested on the spot.
The focus-group tested phrase "universal health care" is also once again on the lips of every Democratic presidential candidate because they know this is what the vast majority of the American people want. Still, with the sole exception of Dennis Kucinich, a co-sponsor of the Medicare-For-All bill in the House, not a single Democratic candidate for president is willing to take on the parasitic private health insurance industry, which sucks up twenty to thirty cents of every American health care dollar in advertising, billing and profits.
With Democratic leaders and corporate media omitting all discussion of Medicare-For-All or any form of single payer health care, private insurance companies can confidently switch a portion of their generous campaign donations from Republicans to Democrats without fear that anything will change.
In the same spirit, candidate presidential candidate Barack Obama's commercials on South Carolina black radio begin with the drive-by observation that there are more young black men in prison than in college before abruptly changing the subject, leaving trusting, and hopeful souls to imagine that electing him will somehow address that issue. After all, as Obama supporter Oprah Winfrey has assured us, wishful thinking really does make it so.
This is the substance of mainstream political discussion in the Democratic party. Deceit, denial, omission, and wishful thinking. So far, it's working. Corporations who till recently only donated to Republicans candidates are including Democrats in their portfolios. Front runners Clinton and Obama are raising more cash than any Republicans this year, most of it from the very wealthy. So you see that the Democratic Party, and democracy really do work. Never mind what Democratic voters want.
Bruce Dixon is Managing Editor of The Black Agenda Report.
© 2007 The Black Agenda Report
16 Comments so far
Show AllGreat article, in your piece you mention twice that only Kucinich truly opposes the war and actually voted against it. The American people can be so superficial and have thus far concentrated on Mr. Kucinich’s small physical stature and his beautiful English wife.
The American people also have the ability to make this little man a GIANT by throwing their support behind him. As pointed out in the article he is the only one who advocates single payer healthcare and an end to funding W’s war and would proceed with impeachment.
So why are we still giving serious consideration to the other mediocre candidates who would only make minor insignificant changes in policy???
We have been living in the Dark Ages for the past six and a half years going backwards in every area imaginable. For the first time in my life I am ashamed to be an American and disgusted with an America that could help put this nut job in office. It is time to give power back to a true representative of the people, lets throw our weight our money and our votes to congressman Kucinich and stop dancing with the stars the press thinks should be in charge of our destiny. The time is now, go with the person who most exemplifies your point of view not who you think has a shot at winning.
capt.clevariant July 27th, 2007 12:30 am
Your points are well taken - but only from the perspective of a politician. And that's the problem, what we need, and what this 2-party system does not allow are "leaders" (as opposed to politicians).
A politician looks only at the poll numbers and how many seats it has. A leader creates a majority by responding to real needs (there is an overwhelming majority in this country against Iraq war, for universal health care, etc.). So, while it is true that the Dems do not have a huge majority in the number of seats in the Congress - at the same time the wish of the overwhelming majority in this country are not being acted upon.
A politician does not care as long h/she can be re-elected, but a leader would create a majority out of the wish of the majority of the people.
Unless this 2-party duopoly is changed, where both parties are bought by and accountable only to big money there is no hope. In this country potential leaders have a snowball's chance in hell to be elected - because as Greg Palast so aptly said, we have the best democracy money can buy.
Unless there is pubic financing of all elections, unless winner take it all election system is changed, we'll keep on getting politicians (rather than leaders); politician with allegiances only to the big money they need to hold on to power.
So forget about the Democratic Party (hello Ms. Pelosi, hello Mr. Conyers!) taking the leadership. All they want is to get reelected, to be on the gravy train. You and me my friend, don't count.
We are screwed - goodbye and good night?
RE: WORKING FOR CHANGE: DEMOCRATS AND/OR THIRD PARTIES?
Paul Bramscher July 26th, 2007 2:38 pm
"we should focus efforts both on third party building — but also on cleansing the crookedness out of the corporate parties."
I too think action on more than one front is the way to go. Unlike some posters on this website, I am not willing to categorically write off all efforts to pressure or shift Democrats.
Again - as I posted you recently - note that the 'third party and the democrats' question is, arguably, the main issue that divides posters on this website, even among those who - like me - vote third party:
baska July 26th, 2007 9:30 am
RE: CAN THIRD PARTIES FORCE DEMOCRATS AWAY FROM RIGHT WING BY THREAT OF LOST VOTES?
Paul Bramscher July 25th, 2007 8:04 pm
“That assumes that party loyalty trumps ideology with the DLC. I don’t think it does. They won’t be scared by the threat of Third Parties. On the contrary, they may benefit from the split (taking their marching orders from corporate America like the Rethugs).â€
1) The enormous Democratic Party capital expended on demonizing Ralph Nader is evidence that Democrats are scared by Third Parties. Many commondreams articles have detailed this.
2) Note that the underlying split on this website’s threads concerns the third party question: not whether to vote third party (a majority will), but the purpose of a third party vote: a) as an alternative to a hopelessly corrupt and unchangeable [and capitalist-system-complicit] Democratic Party, with the goal of a new progressive majority; versus b) as a way of articulating the views of a sizable minority with the goal of halting the rightward trajectory of the Democrats and forcing their platforms left.
In other words - both groups agree on breaking w/Democrats, withholding votes, and going 3rd party, but for quite different reasons.
NADER 08: Excellent points! (On a fiction scale, I am in the process of self-publishing a movie script cum novel based on CLONING Ralph Nader to affect a force against "global corporate capitalism without conscience."
DAVID F: Good argument!
There is one political party in America: the Corporate Party. It has two major factions: the first advocates unabashed militarism abroad along with censorship domestically to create a false consciousness in the populace, based in fear, hatred and paranoia, so they will continue to support this faction electorally even though such support is obviously against 90% of the populace's interests. This faction is called "Republicans".
The second faction is in some ways more insidious. It tends to be more measured in its militarism, though will happily bare its fangs if necessary, preferring economic pressures to bend the world to its will; domestically, it speaks lofty rhetoric to middle America, but when push comes to shove, it produces breadcrumbs at most; and virtually nothing for the working class, working poor and minorities. This faction is called "Democrats".
The Corporate Party needs both factions to survive. It needs the first to feed its insatiable appetite for profits and power and to inject the false consciousness necessary to dupe the populace into supporting its imperialistic efforts. However, this first faction (the Republicans) is like an Id; unchecked it will demand more and more, crush everything that stands in its way and care little of the consequences. If the Corporate Party was composed only if this faction it would stretch itself too far and a popular revolution would result.
Enter the second faction (the Democrats). This faction exists to maintain the Corporate Party's absolute hegemony over America's political, economic and cultural spheres. When the first faction has pushed the populace a little too far, killed too many in imperial wars, robbed the workers of too much, stripped the populace of one too many rights, and pushed people's credulity too far in its creation of false consciousness, the second faction rises to respond. "Vote for us" they say, "and things will change; things will get better". And they do, marginally. Just enough to ensure the Corporate Party is once again secure and unassailable. Once that happens, the first faction returns to loot and maim as much as possible.
I believe in a two party system; I'm just waiting for America to develop a viable second party. A People's Party; a Workers' Party; a Peace Party (or at least anti-imperialistic war party); a Humanitarian Party. Will this ever happen, short of revolution? I don't know. But the first step towards attempting to make it happen is boycotting the Corporate Party (BOTH factions) absolutely. As far as I can tell, there is only one person with the integrity, intelligence, tenacity and chutzpah to spark a genuine Second Party in the United States: Ralph Nader. His efforts in 2000 and 2004 were heroic and much more would have been accomplished had not so many been scared by the first faction of the Corporate Party into supporting the second faction. We need Nader again in 2008, to sustain and inspire the continuing efforts at building a Second Party.
If any of this resonates with you, I urge you to go to http://www.draftnader.org/petition.html and sign the petition.
OK, I admit, I don't know very much. But would somebody explain to me how the democrats could stop the war in Iraq and bring our troops home, pass universal health care, impeach Bush and Cheney, fix the immigration mess, make quality education available to everyone everywhere, end greed and corruption in big business and the media, solve the energy crisis and end global warming - while Bush sits in the White House and the majorities in congress are razor thin? The chances of stopping a filibuster or over-riding a veto in the senate are infintisimal. Or am I missing something? Get real - tell me how we can do it - or quit bellyaching about the weenie's in congress. I really think it will be difficult to get anything done until there is a democrat in the White House, and even then, a republican minority in congress can make it difficult. We all understand this, right? I wouldn't want it any other way. The last thing I want is another imperial president, republican or democrat.
Checks and balances insures that only those things that have the overwhelming support of the American people get passed. Our goal should be to get Americans, democrats or republicans, solidly behind the things we think are important. It's hard, but it shouldn't be easy.
100 years ago Eugene Debs called the US a plutocracy -- a government of, by and for the rich. Nothing's changed.
The Democrats won't stop the criminal war or the war criminal. They're waiting their turn to get on the gravy train.
War is good because it fosters fear and suppresses dissent. The Demos certainly won't stop the fantasy called the "war on terror." Fear will always exist, which means that this war will be eternal. What an ideal situation for those in power! As long as "there's a war on", those working for peace can be portrayed as traitors.
I am really sickened by my own "representative", Nancy Pelosi, someone who supposedly represents the most progressive constituency in the country. She says "The United States must have a military second to none." Not a health care system, not an educational system, not an economic system. The implication is that, despite the fact the US spends as much on its military as the rest of the world combined, it's not enough! Despite the overwhelming views of her constituents, Pelosi has refused to sign on to cuts in military spending.
This world desperately needs leaders who truly wish for peace. This world desperately needs leaders who will abide by and strengthen just, international law. It's vain to look to either the Democrats or Republicans for such leaders.
As I see it, choosing between Republicans and Democrats is like asking whether you want to be stabbed in the chest or in the back.
The Republic is dead. If you're not prepared to fight, be prepared to kneel to the masters.
relayer@q.com
YOu are deluding yourelf. America is not a democratic country. It is a two party duopoly, with two right-wing parties, both paid for by the big money.
If anything it is a "monetocracy". Unlike democracy where 1 person = 1 vote, here it is something like $100,000 = 1 vote.
Dump the M$M (mainstream media).
"When Republicans captured the House and Senate in the third year of Bill Clinton’s administration the media declared the president “irrelevant"."
Dump the M$M (mainstream media).
It's like they're all becoming little Cheneybushies, believing themselves part of the "elite" and all knowing who must lie to "the people" because none of us are smart enough to comprehend the "real" truths of... everything, apparently. It's also possible they've all gone fatalistic on us, accepting the fact that the empire - and the Earth - is collapsing at an escalating rate, and they're gonna grab as much as they can before it all falls apart.
Bet the secret high-tech survival bunker business is booming.
Third parties would be nice, but until we get IRV/Range and get rid of nonsensical things like the unproportionate senate (going to a unicameral parliament instead), we should focus efforts both on third party building -- but also on cleansing the crookedness out of the corporate parties.
Get progressives to attend Republican & Democratic caucuses in their districts, become delegates to their state conventions, and vote for the least crooked candidates in their ranks.
"... because they no longer represent the current 'New Democrat' Democratic Party’s values."
What exactly would those be (besides money and power)?
DUMP THE DEMOCRATS!
UNITE INTO A NEW THIRD PARTY NOW!
We the people, opposed to the destruction of the planet and it's peoples, now atomized and powerless in "grass roots" and "special interest" groups, must unite our efforts and resources into a new party to replace the corrupt Democratic Party! A new party that rejects corporate funding in order to end the corporate plunder of the federal government.
A new party explicitly opposed to the Project for the New American Century. Opposed to unending war for profit and power. Cut the military budget by 50%, shut down the 700 military bases around the world. Re-instate taxes cut by Bush gang.
A new party that commits the entire resources of the country to end global warming, end imperialist wars, implements true non-profit universal health care. promotes mass transportation, develops renewaable energy, and produces the essentials for human survival.
A new party that promotes an economy that works towards fulfilling the economic needs of all the people, not just to profit a tiny minority of super wealthy. No more people living on the streets! No more hospitalized people being dumped into the streets when they have no money or health insurance! (See the film SICKO)
A new party to unite all of the oppressed people of this country. A new party that cuts across all the false social and cultural divisions that keep us forever powerless (racial, ethnic, age, language, etc.). A new party to unite us against the unending destruction of peoples and planet.
A SOCIALIST HUMANIST PARTY to promote the end of gangster capitalism, run-amok capitalism, which is supported by both Democratic and Republican parties.
A new party to support the labor movement and all working people. We urge the labor movement to stop supporting the Democratic Party (already besotted by corporate money), and to focus its precious resources to fund a new national radio and television network. By being on the air 24 hours a day the labor movement can provide the latest news, information, education and current affairs analysis desperately needed by all working people. This effort, combined with the formation of the new party, will be a bold step towards reviving the organized labor movement.
For years we have listened to radio programs like DEMOCRACY NOW! that has discussed with numerous "grass roots" groups desperately struggling to make a positive change in society. Anti-war protest groups, civil rights groups, union struggles, affordable housing groups, teachers unions, health care access, seniors about Social Security, have involved millions of people. Now is the time to unite the energy and resources of the people into a new party.
The new party provides a means of uniting the “special interest†agendas of each group into the platform of the new party. The new party candidates, selected from the various individuals and groups, would become the candidates representing their cause and the new party. The new party will contest for office at every level of government in order to take power. The new party will provide the new leadership and new programs this country desperately needs.
There is still time before November 2008 elections to start this process. Even the announcement and preparation for a founding convention of such a new party will shock both Democrats and Republican incumbents. They will know that their days are numbered!
The needs of all previous "minority" and "special interests" people now become the platform of the new party representing the vast majority of people. Can the existing activists of so-called “minority†and "special interest" groups overcome their existing powerlessness, and link up with each other to start this new party?
This all-inclusive struggle will attract millions of atomized working people, often non-voters and uninvolved people, who have been atomized, exploited, brain-washed by corporate media and ultimately destroyed by gangster capitalism.
Actually, the fact that Democratic candaites that represent what used to be the DP's values can't get money because they no longer represent the current "New Democrat" Democratic Party's values.
It is sad, yet axiomatic, that the less money the candidates have the more likely they are to represent the values of Democratic voters.