"returning the Republican party to its core principles of social and fiscal conservatism" by supporting specific candidates in key races.

Wooah now. We need new parties. The Democrats have shown themselves ineffectual and perpetuators of the status quo. Corporations and business interests effectively run the US, and that will not change no matter which of the two parties that control the US political process is in power.

But the Republicans, the National Capitalist Party of America, the new "Nazkap Partei" of the US, is rotten to the core, it's dead, it is corrupt and dead and stinks from putrification. It's like the Norwegian parrot in the Monty Python skit. John Cleese makes the unambiguous case of it being thoroughly defunct. Give it up you "True Blue Women". It is long since beyond revitalization. Start something new! Move on!

You shouldn't be drinking wine in the living room; you should be drinking Scotch in the garage. Let's get serious. It's the future of the nation.

People are making slow steps to buy and borrow less. If people cut their personal debt and used the minimum of corporate services they would be better off. Regular people have to quit cutting their own throat.

CRCox
I wonder how affective protesting would be if it wasn't actually confronting something? The nature of protest is confrontational. The ironic thing about non-violent protest is that it is often met with violence by the police in order to break it up. With little or no coverage in the main stream press these protests have for the most part been marginalized, like the movement. Walking down main street with a colorful political sign never really attained the goals set forth, fundamental change, it is a parade or a show force(solidarity).

If we Americans really wanted to change our government we'd stop supporting it. Namely tax resistance. The problem with this scenario is that many Americans are addicted/dependent on their unearned lifestyle, they need the government. Our government subsidizes both rich and poor, both types of handouts are unjust and unearned. This system is inherently flawed, based on the fact that it enables exploitation and supports injustice.

I too believed socialism could be a solution to our problems of exploitation, the main problem is that we would have forced to make the same leap of faith in our representatives, and create an even bigger and more powerful system of exploitation. We already live in a Social Republic, although our government socializes and subsidizes business far more than its citizens. Why do people believe that the state is worth working for? Why don't we question the concept of self-sacrifice for the common good? I am a free-thinking radical who values myself and will no longer be deceived by the irrationality of self-sacrifice.

Freedom will never be possible with Socialism.

YES! I've been screaming for someone to organize a General Strike!

GS are effective. If you check out recent success stories of how GS have brought oppressive governments to their knees and they had to listen to the people you too would wonder why we haven't been using this tactic earlier.

Our phone calls, letters, emails, marches, protests and our votes are NOT being listened to! If enough non-essential people stay home from work to bring this country to a standstill and do not purchase anything for that one day we'd be heard.

What have we got to loss? Nothing else is working.

We can't wait till the 09' for the change.

We can't wait for prolonged investigations that are being stonewalled to get justice.

We can't wait for impeachment to be put "back on the table".

We can't wait period! Too much time has been wasted already!

Take the day off for PEACE!

Out of Iraq/Impeach NOW! SEPT. 11th GENERAL STRIKE!

http://liberalpro.blogspot.com/2007/08/general-strike-91107.html

"Political analysts say there is some evidence that the confluence of American voices is catching the attention of politicians, but it remains to be seen how much influence the movement may have."

I can answer this statement: local politicians, maybe, the Congress NONE!

I applaud the grassroots efforts. But instead of wasting time pressuring members of the Congress, it would be better to make a bigger statement by voting them out of office and installing intelligent, competent people who REPRESENT THE PEOPLES' INTERESTS, NOT CORPORATE INTERESTS!!

I too applaud the grassroots efforts, and am even happier about the fact that finally AVERAGE Americans are taking part. Not just people like us who devote so much of our time to activism, but regular Americans who usually do not look closely at the candidates.

Time for a Third Party Revolution!

Grassroots democracy is number one on the Green Party Platform and on Mike Gravel's plan. Direct democracy where the people make the laws, not corrupt politicians, can give us lasting democracy:

The National Initiative for Democracy

A POPULIST CONCEPT OF DEMOCRACY

"Let the People Decide"

The central power of government in a democracy is lawmaking –– not voting. Those who make the laws determine how, when, and if voters can vote. Florida and Ohio are but recent examples. Governments throughout history have been tools of oppression; they need not be. American citizens can gain control of their government by becoming lawmakers and turning its purpose to public benefit, and stemming government growth––the people are more conservative than their elected officials regardless of political party.

Are the people qualified enough to make laws directly to govern their lives? They're qualified enough on Election Day to give their power away to political candidates who manipulate the electoral process to get elected. In fact, it's easier to decide one's self-interest directly than it is to guess the mind of a representative who will naturally put his or her self-interest first.

More than 70% of the voters already make laws by initiative in twenty-four states and in numerous local communities, and when voting on bond issues referred to them for decision by their representatives––serious lawmaking. American voters have made laws for the last 100 years and their record is as good as their elected legislators––with respect to fiscal matters, the people's record is far superior.

How do Americans become lawmakers? The Congress is not likely to dilute its power by empowering the people as lawmakers. Therefore, the people themselves must enact the National Initiative for Democracy, a proposed law that empowers them as lawmakers.

The National Initiative is a legislative package sponsored by The Democracy Foundation (www.nationalinitiative.us), a non-profit IRS 501 C (3) corporation that includes an Amendment to the Constitution and a Federal Statute. The Democracy Amendment 1) amends the Constitution asserting the legislative powers of the people, 2) sanctions the national election conducted by the nonprofit corporation Philadelphia II, giving Americans the opportunity to vote on the National Initiative, 3) creates an Electoral Trust (vital to maintain citizen lawmaking independent of representatives) and defines the role of its trustees, and 4) outlaws the use of monies not from natural persons in initiative elections.

The Democracy Act is a proposed federal statute that 1) sets out deliberative legislative procedures (copied from Congress) to be used for initiative lawmaking by citizens in every government jurisdiction of the United States, 2) defines the limited powers of the Electoral Trust that administers the legislative procedures on behalf of the people, and 3) defines the electoral threshold that must be reached for the National Initiative to become the law of the land. It is important to understand that the National Initiative does not alter the existing structure or powers of representative governments. Rather, it adds an additional Check –– the People –– to our system of Checks and Balances, while setting up a working partnership between the people and their elected representatives.

How can American voters amend the Constitution and enact the National Initiative if Congress opposes it? The people must go around all three branches of government to amend the Constitution. There are only two venues within our government structure where constitutions, constitutional amendments, and laws can be enacted into law: the people or their elected representatives. The Framers in Article 7 of the Constitution provided a procedure for We, the People to ratify the Constitution and thereby create our government, but failed to provide procedures for the people to alter the Constitution, even though they repeatedly said the people had the right to change their government as they saw fit. However, the Framers did provide amending procedures for themselves in Article V, thereby perpetuating control of government be elites.

Conventional wisdom now holds that Article V is the only way to amend the Constitution. Article V is how the government amends the Constitution, not how the people do it. If the people had to use Article V to amend the Constitution they would need permission from two-thirds of the Congress and three-fourths of the state legislatures. This would mean that the creator of our government, the people, would have to get permission from their elected representatives, the createes of the people, to amend the Constitution. This logic is ludicrous. The constituent power of the people––the source of all political power––cannot be subject to the power of its creation.

James Madison had it right when he said that the people could just do it. The people can amend the Constitution and make laws as long as the process they employ is fair, transparent and reasonable. The National Initiative, the ongoing people's legislative procedures, is just that and the national election conducted by Philadelphia II to enact the National Initiative under the precedent of Article 7 is fair, transparent and reasonable. Today's communication technology permits us to ask all American citizens if they wish to be empowered as lawmakers and if a majority of voters who voted in the last presidential election so affirm–– regardless of the view of those in government––then the National Initiative becomes the law of the land

If Americans wish to be empowered as lawmakers and truly have a government "by the People" they must go to the Democracy Foundation's web site: www.nationalinitiative.us to learn about the National Initiative and to the Philadelphia II linked site: www.votep2.us to vote. Please support the effort with a tax deductible contributions.

The complete text of the National Initiative can also be found at: www.Gravel08.us Senator Gravel's campaign web site or at: www.nationalinitiative.us.

The National Initiative is a great idea, and most Americans would probably back it. However, Gravel's position on taxation and health care are not nearly as brilliant. How long have you been on the Gravel campaign "ezeflyer"? I must say, you do a great job. Gravel has really upped his presence in Common Dreams world with your help.

I read a biography on G.W. Bush and it mentioned how during the late 60s and early 70s, he did not like all the protesting that was going on and he seemed to like Nixon.

This is almost a flash back to the times that he did not like. People are thinking for themselves and speaking out. What they are saying is not going along with the status quo. Only this time, it is HIS status quo that they are talking about.

Common sense,

I understand your frustration. But let's be realistic, things do not happen simply because an individual says they should.

Richard Mellor could call a general strike, I have 25 years of activity in the Unions and local politics but I would be fooling myself and anyone else to think that subjectively I have the influence to pull it off. No one knows me. My social power is extremely limited to say the least.

I know a number of left organizations that have called for general strikes but their influence among the working class is practically non existent (mostly because they don't actually orient to the working class). I remember one group at work always lecturing workers that we need a socialist revolution. Well, I agree with that, but that will not occur simply because I, or an organization with 50 people in it call for it.

The labor leaders are in a position to call a general strike. They have the the social power, they actually have a social base, they represent something. But even with them, they have engineered so many defeats, given up so willingly their members' wages, benefits and rights, that that their credibility is shot and great efforts would be necessary to build for it. But they have the resources to do this.

The strategists of labor who have the same world view as the employers which limits their demands offer very little to those outside the unions. A campaign for a $15 an hour minimum wage would draw millions of workers, especially youth, in to the arms of labor.

Building an independent workers party as an alternative to the Democrats would also have an appeal as long as it's program was not limited to what the Democrats and the academics and labor "experts" that give intellectual credibility to their arguments deem is "realistic".

It is this class collaboration of the top labor leadership, the absence of the subjective factor that gives the employers such confidence and has led to years of decline in our living standards.

Due to the stifling role of the labor leadership I think it quite likely that wildcat strikes, and movements of opposition to the offensive of capital will begin outside of these traditional structures of the working class. But even so, there is no way the officials organizations will not be rocked and changed by external developments, drawing the millions of organized workers in to the fray.

The man in

But I remember going with a co-worker, new to activism, to my Union's International Convention one time and he was frustrated at the lavishness of it. He didn't like that the president was on about $360,000 a year either. But I pointed out that Clinton was there at the request of the President, Gerald MCentee. Had I invited Clinton I am sure the result would not have been the same.

The labor leaders are a potential threat sitting atop an organization of 12 million workers that has the potential to stop communications, transportation, auto, and state and country governments from functioning. There is potential power there, that is why the Democrats court the labor leaders, it's a strategy to help keep any of the memberships anger and inherent hatred of the boss from breaking out in to an organized opposition and for the effect a revolt in organized labor would naturally have on workers and the middle class as a whole.

There is no doubt that the members of organized labor will at some point overcome the obstacle of their own leadership. But they are entrenched and supported by a section of the bourgeois who give them some social recognition They also have an army of staffers and mid-level officials who help suppress any opposition that wants to fight back therefore threatening the comfortable relationship they have built with the employers and their politicians in the Democratic Party.

Common sense,

I understand your frustration. But let's be realistic, things do not happen simply because an individual says they should.

Richard Mellor could call a general strike, I have 25 years of activity in the Unions and local politics but I would be fooling myself and anyone else to think that subjectively I have the influence to pull it off. No one knows me. My social power is extremely limited to say the least.

I know a number of left organizations that have called for general strikes but their influence among the working class is practically non existent (mostly because they don't actually orient to the working class). I remember one group at work always lecturing workers that we need a socialist revolution. Well, I agree with that, but that will not occur simply because I, or an organization with 50 people in it call for it.

The labor leaders are in a position to call a general strike. They have the social power, they actually have a social base, they represent something. But even with them, they have engineered so many defeats, given up so willingly their members' wages, benefits and rights, that that their credibility is shot and great efforts would be necessary to build for it. But they have the resources to do this.

The strategists of labor who have the same world view as the employers which limits their demands to what is acceptable to the laws of the market, offer very little to those outside the unions. A campaign for a $15 an hour minimum wage would draw millions of workers, especially youth, in to the arms of labor.

Building an independent workers party as an alternative to the Democrats would also have an appeal as long as its program was not limited to what the Democrats and the academics and labor "experts" that give intellectual credibility to their arguments deem is "realistic".

It is this class collaboration of the top labor leadership, the absence of the subjective factor that gives the employers such confidence and has led to years of decline in our living standards.

Due to the stifling role of the labor leadership I think it quite likely that wildcat strikes, and movements of opposition to the offensive of capital will begin outside of these traditional structures of the working class. But even so, there is no way these traditional organizations will not be rocked and changed by external developments, drawing the millions of organized workers in to the fray.

The man in South Carolina may have the best intentions in the world. But the road to hell is paved with good intentions as they say.

We are in for a bumpy ride ahead.

Seems as if everyone believes the the current White House has intentions of handing over the White House to someone else in 2009. Read Jack London's "IRON HEEL" and see what's in store for us. Brown shirts will not only be mandatory, they will be fashionable.
Hoa binh

Depends on what the grassroots groups do. If all they do is to line up and support the same pro-war, pro-corporate candidates that the Democrats always nominate for office these days, then it won't change a think.

There is a basic question of how do you call for and organize an effective general strike in an environment where most Americans watch the corporate media which of course will completely ignore your call for a general strike. If 10 people go out on general strike, all they do is get in trouble at work or lose their jobs. You need a massive number of Americans to all do it at the same time. How do you do that? Do you think a comment on Commondreams.org is going to do it?

To be honest, I think elections are hopeless, and that even if we organized effective grassroots campaigns then the computers that count the votes still wouldn't recognize us as the winner. So its likely you are on the right track of thinking of non-violent actions that can try to show objection to the course of the country. But how you pull it off is beyond me. Get it organized, and I won't be at work that day. But I'd be surprised if you get it organized.

Hello all: yeah i agree, the cure for USA is socialism, not libertarian free-market neoliberalism, nor corporate-oligarchic clintonism or corporate bushism :-)

Namvet67 -- I read something recently that said, "If anyone thinks these people are just going to walk away from power after the 2008 election, they haven't been paying attention."

I agree with you. They will try SOMETHING to either prevent the next election or something that will prevent whoever wins (after all the voting fraud) from taking power. No way will they ever concede and give it up willingly. These people don't know HOW to 'play nice'.

But I have hope because of the groundswell from the people. We (and THEY)are in for a tremendous struggle, which has already begun. We're fighting for our freedoms and our Bill of Rights and our Constitution that "they" are trying to destroy. We will take America back from the thieves in the night. It won't be easy, but it will happen as long as we don't quit and our numbers keep growing.

PS ... the only way you get the attention of the politicians in Congress is when you put their jobs at risk. Start voting some out of office, and then you'll get their attention. If you don't show that level of power, they'll right you off as meaningless. And from their perspective they'll be right.

Which is why I think the first targets should be Democrats. I don't care who wins the elections. I just would like to see some prominent Democrats get beat because a Green Party or Independent candidate took enough votes away from them to make them lose. Then we should crow about it. We should make sure every other Democratic congress critter knows these first targets lost their jobs because they pissed off the base of the Democratic Party. Then they'll listen very closely to what we say.

Sorry guys, the only way to effectively change the system is to rise up in revolt, overthrow our government, and establish a dictatorship of the proletariat.

Congratulations to progressives on outreach efforts to the mainstream public. This task is crucial, as public unity against our oppressor, the beast, is necessary to complete our overthrow and subjugation of the beast. The public is searching for the progressive path. Can we help the public find it?

ezeflyer, how do we prevent the beast from commandeering the National Initiative for Democracy in the same way the beast has commandeered the California initiative system?

Our Fascist Dictator may throw all of in jail but then we will be in the best of company!

These clowns aren't going anywhere unless they are escorted off the stage, probably by force. They have some dubious characters among their ranks, like all the resigned appointees and the others who were voted out. You know, like Rummy, Poindexter, Gingrich, Norquist-just bad juju on his part, and all the rest of the Cheney/Rove shadow gov't. They have been busily working to dismantle the democratic process for a few decades now, they aren't likely to let it slip from their death-grip any time soon.

They already have some serious "watcher" activity going on, like detaining protestors prior to a protest, monitoring their private and personal movements and connections...

It isn' just 1984 anymore, it's Animal Farm too!!

Be careful about voting the "bums" out -- sometimes changing the mind of a known quantity is a better deal (and actually easier) than stumping for an unknown quantity who promises "change." Remember that several of the freshman Democrats who replaced Republicans in the Senate, including Jim Webb and Amy Klobuchar, voted FOR warrantless wiretapping.

The article below suggests that there IS a leftward shift in Congress (okay, somewhat glacial at this point, but we don't yet have a filibuster-proof majority) and that it has come more from conservative Dems shifting leftward than new Dems starting out that way.

http://www.openleft.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=654

The point is that we have to keep the heat on -- get some kind of coalition going amongst all these new and newly-energized groups -- and turn it up.

About every day I have been reading about a group of people getting arrested in a Congressperson's office in an attempt to protest the war. Usually it's a handful of people (about six is the average). Clearly there are enough of us that we could make this tactic a lot more viable. How about twelve people in each of five or ten Congresspeople's offices every day? How about twenty in twenty? Fifty in fifty? That's just 2500 people. There are more than that living in a two-block radius from me, and they all want Bush impeached and behind bars, and the troops home. Get off your butts and DO SOMETHING.

QUOTE:

namvet67 August 9th, 2007 3:32 pm

Seems as if everyone believes the the current White House has intentions of handing over the White House to someone else in 2009.

END QUOTE

Yes, most people do seem to believe that, for some reason. Well, the reason is denial.

Just like many were "surprised" and "shocked" that the Bush-Enabling Dems willingly did another "YES" Bush last Friday (this time for spying), people will again be "surprised" and "shocked" should Dictators Bush and Cheney refuse to leave for reasons of "national security" and "we're at war." Personally, I don't see them going anywhere.

If people saw the Bush Crime Family (and their enabling Dems) for who and what they truly are and that they will do literally anything to accomplish their goals, people wouldn't be the least bit "surprised" or "shocked" by any of this stuff.

But denial is a very comfortable place for many people. That's how Germany ended up with Hitler during WWII, because of that comfortable place.

And now we in the States are ending up in the same situation.

"US Political Climate Ripe for Grassroots Groups"

ATOMIZED grassroots groups that only express specific demands they will remain isolated and powerless.
UNITED the grassroots groups collectively represent the needs of the people for peace.
UNITED TO END MULTI-NATIONAL CORPORATE CAPITALISM, PROJECT FOR THE NEW AMERICAN CENTURY! Humanity will not survive as individuals and as society as humanity with the unending war of corporate capitalism! Stop polluters destroying the planet while making profit!
UNITED to transform a dying planet into a world devoted to world peace and sustainable economics!
UNITED Grassroots Groups must realize it is impossile to reform the corporate controlled DEMOCRATIC PARTY.
UNITED Grassroots Groups must merge their individual agendas and causes into a national platform of a new party.
UNITED WE STAND, DIVIDED WE FALL!

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 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.

Read daily World Socialist Web Site
http://www.wsws.org

"The country is ripe for a change," said Sheehan, who spoke at a podium with her son's photograph attached to it. "It's going to start right here and right now."
.
.
Does anyone know how to send money for Sheehan's campaign? The Neo American Revolution starts here!
.
It's time to sacrifice the corporations on the altar of Mars and not our, or their, children.

Bush will leave when his time is up and people will say: "Nothing became his Presidency as much as his leaving of it."

I hope grassroots movements can save us. Congress has failed us and The Supreme Court won't try.

If we were a democracy then how could a President with a low 30% approval rating and a Congress with even less keep their jobs? The answer is: we don not have a democracy.

rtdrury asked:

"ezeflyer, how do we prevent the beast from commandeering the National Initiative for Democracy in the same way the beast has commandeered the California initiative system?"

The beast will go kicking and screaming, lying and scheming as usual. But we all know it will go only if we the people get together and decide to take our power back from politicians and their oligarch puppetmasters.

Mike Gravel's National Initiative for Democracy seems to have the best plan and the Green Party seems to be the best rallying point.

Direct democracy has proved a most successful form of government and the Greens are the largest worldwide progressive organization with the most experience in direct grassroots democracy.

Greens continue to be the fastest growing third party even as they're ignored by an MSM that knows Greens will not sell out and will not be commandeered.

Now is the time to consider a Third Party AND a more DIRECT DEMOCRACY. At no other time in our Country's history has the concept of DIRECT DEMOCRACY been possible. Congress has acted as the high priests and priestesses of the God of Democracy. Perhaps we no longer need Congress to commune and partake of Democracy. It is time--far past the time--for us all to ask: whom does Congress serve? The interests of the American people? I THINK NOT! Congress does not serve Democracy and the American people. Congress serves Mammon and international corporatocracy. Why would someone spend millions and millions of dollars to secure a precarious position that only pays $165,000 per year?

Run for Political Office!

Can a grassroots movement make things happen fast enough to impeach anyone, or will the next presidential election be over before anything can happen?

A lot of the power in American government is within the bureaucracy itself, not just the politicians that come and go.
To institute real change, the grassroots movement would have to be looking at structural changes to the government like
the Sarbanes-Oxley Bill X 1000.

That is something that could very well be spun as revolutionary or anti-American by the status quo.
And perhaps given the Patriot Act, or other presidential executive order, maybe such actions could be illegal anyway, or at least argued to death, until they fade away.

I have never seen people so angry. The other day a man was in the store buying cat food. He became infuriated because the cans were getting smaller and smaller. He used to buy a brand of food that was the cheapest cat food. He was angry to hear that it was not available here. He stated he should kill his cats. I said "it is not the cats fault the prices keep rising." He responded he only makes so much and does not get raises as fast as prices rise.
The worker is being dumped on they are blamed for the high costs incurred by businesses, expect to increase productivity and yet not ask for a raise or health care.
People are angry because they are being lied to by their government.
This is going to open up into huge protests-like the world has never seen. Illkillya will not even want to be affiliated with this. There are not enough prisons to house us all. I wonder if Bush and co. will shoot us like Tinnamon square?
I doubt it-not with his religion and him so pro-human rights for the foreigners. We could use a little tolerance-after all we have only been paying the bills for everyone else to ride.
What a rip off society! I buy from non-corporations and I find I do not need all of the cheap goods manufactored abroad. I can pick up what I need for a quarter at a yard sale.
The corporations are not using the money to take care of us so who cares if they make it or not. Let them set up shop in China or India.

QUOTE:

metroeloise August 9th, 2007 9:16 pm

Run for Political Office!

END QUOTE

What about our fraudulent, corrupt national voting system?

What good will it do for "progressives" to run for office only to have those of the public who do vote cast a ballot on a fraudulent, illegitimate e-voting system owned by Repugs? Now mind you, the Bush-Enabling Dems helped push for the easily-hackable electronic voting machines as well.

Does anyone know how write-in votes for candidates are counted? I know this is an extremely naive question, but I wonder if write-in votes are the key to cracking the control of the two party system. Is a properly spelled write-in vote for an independent person counted? Would the Electoral College be required to vote for a non-party candidate if they received the majority of votes?

Let's say, you and 50-100 million other friends don't like your choice between right-wing nut job and spineless right-wing-nut-job-want-a-be. So, instead of choosing between the two institutional choices, you and your friends decide to write in the SAME name.

I know this idea is fraught with many problems, but the current system is rigged and will only produce more of the same. The hurdles for third parties (getting on the ballots, getting a voice in the debates, spoiler image, etc.) have effectively marginalized them.

However, it seems like the majority of Americans are ready for a third choice. So, when the public gets buyers remorse with next year's choices of Clinton/Obama vs. Right-Wing-Nut-Job, I think that would be an excellent time to announce a populist third choice (to be written in).

The decision of these populist candidates (enough for every congressional district) would be decided via the Internet (YouTube, CD, blogs, etc.) and promoted grassroots-guerilla-style-marketing. Essentially, we would hold our own primaries...outside of the system and the MSM!

It is a long shot, but I do not see how any real changes can occur until enough like minded individuals are in the majority.

www.pdamerica.org : Three years old this week, and ask Rep. Barbara Lee about the work they are doing. It's about building a movement both inside and outside the Democratic Party. Progressives first; Democrats second. This means that those outside the Party are our allies for systemic change.

erma commented:

QUOTE:

metroeloise August 9th, 2007 9:16 pm

Run for Political Office!

END QUOTE

What about our fraudulent, corrupt national voting system?

What good will it do for "progressives" to run for office only to have those of the public who do vote cast a ballot on a fraudulent, illegitimate e-voting system owned by Repugs? Now mind you, the Bush-Enabling Dems helped push for the easily-hackable electronic voting machines as well.

[End Quote]

Kind of like NancyP's argument to keep impeachment off the table. Since we can't obviously succeed we needn't try! Honest assessment of the obstacles is not justification for not acting on your principles. To not set out because you can't see a sure route to success? In fact, to not act on principle is the very most important enabling ingredient for fascist stew.

So the question re-frames into how? Given these obstacles how do we get a new middle party or revitalizes the existing ones? Living a principled life entails congruentcy from arena to arena of our lives. Democratic principles applied to domestic policy and to foreign policy can be done. We need to run for office, encourage others, support others, join others, locally and as a new party. Now. Right now. In time for the next election. Then we all wear Purple the day after Election Day and see.

Karl_Marx wrote:

"Hello all: yeah i agree, the cure for USA is socialism, not libertarian free-market neoliberalism, nor corporate-oligarchic clintonism or corporate bushism"

I don't think you should pay these two bastards so much honour as to refer to their 'grand ideas' as yet another 'ism'.
I think once this is all over, we should refer to these years and these political ideas, just as 'trash'. That will say it all.

BTW: I think 'marxism' is generally also a bad idea, even though Karl Marx had quite some interesting things to say and many of them are still valid today.

I'm all in favor of grass roots activism, but to you folks who favor the National Initiative movement: Do you really want people who rely on Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly and Fox News for their information and people who voted for W a SECOND time to participate directly in law-making?

Several people said they don't think the cabal currently running the government will hand over power willingly in '09. But I'd lay money they will. Outright, obvious takeover, declaration of martial law, dictatorship--such things are just not how it's done here. We will have a new government in January '09...a new government just like the old government, serving the same masters and with essentially the same policies although they will probably be prettied up and somewhat restrained because the party officially in charge will probably be the Democratic Party. The way it's done here, the ruling clique selects at least two Presidents, each of whom in unquestionably loyal, and then we get to pick between them. Kind of like having a choice in the wallpaper of your prison. This is why trying to make change through electoral politics will win us nothing--unless we are able to get the voting machines and electoral college thrown out, open up the debates to third parties, and even get to the root causes of this situation--the legalized bribery system that guarantees only the rich are represented, and the control of the mass media by the same corporations that get massive profits from unending wars and the subjugation of the majority of the people--and should we mention the fact that we are doing nothing while the destruction of our life support system, our only planet, edges into the red zone?
So if electoral politics is a dead end in the current circumstances, what will work? I'm with Commonsense--a general strike is the fastest way to force change, the most practical way to get changes that legally must be implemented by a Congress that theoretically represents us but in fact represents corporations (with a handful of exceptions).
To be effective, it should not be a single day--that will accomplish little. It should be a Monday, and if the demanded change (impeachment, withdrawal of troops, stopping a threatened strike on iran) doesn't happen, which it won't, then the following week it would be Monday and Tuesday. The next week would be Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday, but that likely would not be necessary, not if we got good participation. The strike means no work, no attending classes, and most importantly, NO SPENDING MONEY, on anything. What do we do all day? Put on teach-ins in our local communities to educate those who are angry but don't know what's really going on.
Yes, it's true that without massive participation a strike would not be effective, any more than any other tactic would be. Therefore, it would have to be well-prepared in advance.

This is a really interesting thread that has developed, glad to see it, because grassroots efforts - in one form or another - are what will get us back on track in this country. Several of you have taken that bold step to declaring this an emergency, an emergency that must be dealt with by means of insurrection, revolution, and creating an underground. I am totally on board, but there are some things we must consider before we go down that path:
1- For the most part, revolutionary progressives are not usually the ones with the guns, and if you plan to take over the government of the United States by force - which seems to be what one person suggested - it will indeed be violent. I'm not even thinking of the government, because most American soldiers and National Guardsman would not kill other Americans in honor of Bush. I'm more worried about the red neck flag wavers who would driving down out of the mountains the minute they heard about a socialist political revolution taking place, dig? I would rather not get involved with guns. I'd rather be a part of an organization that is so well planned, that a very small amount of guns, if any at all, are needed.
2- If all we want is insurrection, which basically just means cutting off the head - figuratively and perhaps literally - of the leadership, we can do that, but we have to hope that there are enough revolutionaries to take control of the government once the leaders are disposed. I'm not convince that infrastructure is there.
3- In order for any revolution, whether political or social, to be successful, the movement itself must have a cadre of leadership ready to go. It doesn't mean there must be a charismatic leader like a Stalin, a Lenin, etc., but there must be people sufficiently talented to actually take over the control of running the government apparatus - along with all those leaders who stick around following the upheaval - for the long haul, not just for the few months after the revolution. We don't to simply push ourselves into complete ruin. This is a very populated country, and many people will die very quickly if our energy grid does not stay up and running. Of course, these infrastructure concerns can be systematically protected during the upheaval if all is done well.

Anyway, the point is, the United States is LONG OVERDUE for a revolution of grand proportions, but the parties and organizations who are capable of providing the necessary leadership are small and don't have much in the way of popular support. There is the Revolutionary Communist Party, but I personally don't like their identification with Maoism. There is the United States Communist Party, which I actually think is a fantastic organization and if provided with a much larger membership would easily have the organizational ability, but again they are not ready yet. I highly suggest checking out their platform. It is basically right in line with the Greens, and many other progressive organizations around the country as well. If we put all these organizations together into a giant legal non-profit association of groups that declare their goal being the "great political evolution" or something along those lines, the government could not call it illegal or seditious.

Hopefully I have made some sense here. I would love to hear from some of you in regard to other ideas you may have. It is one thing to talk about revolution and another to understand it and plan for it. In the words of one of the greatest revolutionary theorists of all time, Crane Britton, "Revolution is one of the looser words."

RE: GRASSROOTS "GROUNDSWELL" CALLING FOR CHANGE IN GOVT? OR JUST PEOPLE SPENDING MORE TIME ON INTERNET?

The article gives little evidence of such a "groundswell" calling for change in government...

One 'expert' cites a post-2004 "'proliferation of activist groups,'" one poll points to more people closely following the early presidential campaign...

Numbers of websites and numbers of 'visitors' is not identical to grassroots strength, nor does it point to changed political outlooks: increase in political websites may simply reflect more time spent on the internet by Americans - time that does not change viewpoint but simply supports already existing points of view...the 'internet-ization' of political opinion...

A good question for progressives would be whether 'atomized' sectors of a potentially progressive coalition have been brought into political awareness and activity by the internet.

Bang on! In order for grassroots efforts online to become truly effective, they must take it back offline. That will become in the coming years the most important aspect of grassroots organizing - taking the netroots to the grass.

I'll also pipe up regarding the calls for socialism. We need to get to a post left/right analysis, and perhaps a post-ism and post-partisan culture. For my part, I don't care what the "ism" is, so long as we have an honest and fair government. The major specific characteristics should be: population-proportionate unicameral, no concept of a unitary, Range or IRV voting, no electronic voting machines.

One of the problems with grassroots movements is that they tend to be led by professional activists. Like any other professional, they develop a formula that "works" and pretty much stick to it. There is no thinking outside the box. There are also those who seem to continually promote a class of proven bad ideas, and one wonders if they are provacateurs, etc.

The moment I see some group asking for money, I know all bets are off. Sure, everyone has overhead costs. But what a group must solicit above all else is a call for solidarity and engagement. Soliciting money as a central theme of any grassroots group is one of the nails in the lid of its coffin.

Cited as an example of its power, the children's health insurance program, mind you, financed by smokers. Well, why stop there. Perhaps Congress should tax wine and booze to help finance infrastructure. How about fat fast food and beer to finance the Iraq occupation. Lets not forget tennis shoes and t-shirts to finance schools. I'm sure creative minds could think of more to add.

RE: AND NOW...COMING TO YOU ON High Definition STREAMING VIDEO FEED...GRASSROOTS IN CYBERSPACE...

CRCox August 10th, 2007 9:57 am
"for grassroots efforts online to become truly effective, they must take it back offline."

Yea, I think so - there's this technological-utopian premise to the article that the internet will change things - but to paraphrase COMarc above, grassroots activity means little if all it does is ratify support for the system.

This is related to the problem I have with Jeremy Wells' above proposal to foment change by getting the labor movement to "focus its precious resources to fund a new national radio and television network."

I think face-to-face organizing activity, close to the ground, dealing with issues that face people, is what has a chance to both get people involved and gain the trust necessary to change their views. Contact and trust are big - progressive news won't do it, imo - but work with organizers and organizations that show themselves to be committed to you has a chance.

John Lennon we need you!!! All we are saying... Give Peace a chance!! Great man..Great compassion..Killed by a confused sick wannabee! Anyway all this talk about grassroots caused me to think of him. Imagine..all the people living for today.. We miss you John your music your message it's timeless!! God bless!!

RE: 1) A 'POST-IDEOLOGICAL' WORLD; 2) GRASSROOTS CRITICISMS - EXAMPLES?

Paul Bramscher August 10th, 2007 10:02 am
"regarding the calls for socialism. We need to get to a post left/right analysis"

1) I've questioned this outlook of yours before. As I see it, a lot of politics is about power - and a lot of political outcomes in the US are driven by and benefit those with economic and political power.

There is a royal screw going on. How to change it? On the one hand, I think the fundamental self interest of those benefitting from this screw will make them unwilling to change their 'paradigms' to think in terms of a "fair[ness]"; and then, on the other, I think that grasping the 'class warfare' dimension of this screw - which I see not as ideology but the ugly reality of the situation - is crucial to the powerless and ideologically confused fighting back.

You could say that class warfare is a belief in fairness - with attitude.

"One of the problems with grassroots movements is that they tend to be led by professional activists....develop a formula that 'works'...no thinking outside the box. There are also those who seem to continually promote a class of proven bad ideas."

2) Vague, overly generalizing, imo. What groups are you thinking of? And what "class of proven bad ideas"?

RE: I'M WITH YOU ON 'GRASSROOTS,' BUT..."ENOUGH REVOLUTIONARIES TO TAKE CONTROL OF THE GOVERNMENT"? GET REAL.

CRCox August 10th, 2007 9:33 am

Some beautiful, utopian ideas here...but this is not 1789 or 1917...the U.S. is a right wing country, and that is not just a question of leadership, but of masses - the mass base of the right, the centrist (but not left) liberal base...and the tiny left wing base. This in a situation w/a diminishing industrial working class base...

In the U.S., we progressives "don't have much in the way of popular support."

Nope - and that's the situation that makes all this crazy inspired talk of general strikes and guns irrelevant. As Che Guevara said, where armed uprising is concerned, support of the masses is the "indispensable condition." Indispensible. Without mass support, you're nothing.

As grim and piecemeal and demoralizing as it might be, progressives have to start with a 'reality principle' - and that begins with slow grassroots organizing. Where - and whether - that may lead (whether personal benefits for being 'active,' changing a few minds, piecmeal change, or revolution), who can say?

RE: Jeremy Wells on progressive media - see above

Jeremy Wells August 9th, 2007 5:52 pm

baska: Very good points made here. However, I feel I must remind you that I did indeed am in line with your thoughts on slow movement. The reason I felt it necessary to talk about the natural historical needs for any successful revolution, is because I think in today's age, many people don't realize that revolutions are successful because their respective movements are organized in such a way as to be prepared to take over if they win. Simple language, but I don't want to get into a thesis here. Also, I believe that revolution happens in two pieces: the revolutionary movement, then the actual revolution itself, which is the replacement of one governmental monopoly with another.

Unfortunately for the movement, you are quite correct when you say that essentially we have a very long way to go. I do think that the computer-generated activism is a great jump start to getting millions of previously unactivated people activated and organized. The Daily Kos convention is a great start. We need a hundred of those every year.

Dougrambo: I seriously doubt some "sick, confused wannabee" killed John Lennon. It was just another political assassination just like all the rest. When any leader who is as powerful and charismatic as John Lennon is shooting his mouth off like he was there is only one solution to nip the problem in the bud. And we have all been witness to what that is.

There are some stone cold realities we all need to deal with in the United States.

I watched "An Unreasonable Man" last night which is the documentary about the life and struggles of Ralph Nader. People like to whine and complain that he was a "spoiler" in 2000. There has been extensive analysis done into this and it all proves he did NOT act as a spoiler. Gore and Lieberman lost it fair and square (with a little help from some rotten electoral manipulations).

Besides, why would so many people on this website complain about a guy who caused the Democratic Koolaid Makers to lose?! I realize their losing caused their REALLY evil twin to rule, but let's not forget those twins are attached at the hip.

We know in our hearts and minds that a "New Party" is our only hope. And this has to be coupled with paper voting in every state and the American People doing the counting, just like they did in Florida. If we do not DEMAND that every rotten electronic/computerized voting machine be deep-sixed and replaced by a paper ballot (such as an Absentee ballot that you fill out, date and sign and XEROX!!) and that ALL counting be done by thousands of ordinary Americans at their polling places on Election Day, then we will showing ourselves and the whole world that we are truly sheeple who don't deserve to have a democracy.

Here's the other thing we need to realize. Most people who are registered as Democrats are, I think, going along to get along. We can write these people off as a lost cause. Then there are the hard core Republicans. They are far right-wingers, anti-abortion, Bible Belters. They can be written off.

The base for people who think like us, who are truth-seekers and Constitutionalists at our cores would be all those who have been sitting on the sidelines for years not registering or participating at all. And there would also be the "disaffected" Democrats (like me and many on this site). We need hard analysis to figure all this out. I'm pretty sure these numbers have already been crunched somewhere??

Tapping into a two-pronged movement to create a third party AND organize for free and fair elections without computers with all votes being counted by the people is a HUGE undertaking that would require $$$! In order to be effective you need bases of operations. Offices, phones, Xerox machines, faxes, people who are experts in their fields like publicists etc.

Then there is the question of whether to simply go "Independent" or "Green". The Green Party is a fairly well established party in the U.S. But in order to stand a chance I think the Green Party would need to have a Presidential, and Vice Presidential candidate AND a pre-chosen "cabinet" so everyone would know exactly which direction a Green Party government would want to take the country. And obviously candidates would need to be run on the same agenda nationally as Greens for the House, a third of the Senate, plus any other local offices that are open.

We would need to try to make a clean sweep of the whole system.

And because we are living in a country of so many RABID right-wing people (just drive cross country on the 40 East through Albuquerque and Memphis etc.)...or ask Cindy Sheehan about the people in Alabama!), we would have to be very careful about any "fringe" candidates who would want to be involved! It's just a fact folks! You can talk all you want about "Not for profit single payer national health care", but the minute you say the "S" word you're screwed! Or the "C" word!!!

Someone else said, "We need to get off these pages and organize!" That's true. But again, the reality is we need money and talent to make simple ideas come to life and take flight. We are up against a mighty corporate controlled media that simply ignores everyone until they no longer can. They have marginalized Ron Paul since the beginning, but if they have a fair election tomorrow in Iowa and he wins or does very well the MSM will have a problem on their hands! And he's a true Republican with not one skeleton in his closet (that I've heard of). Think about this: The MSM is pushing Guilliani down the Republican electorates throats and he's PRO-CHOICE! And a Blue State New Yorker for God's sake! If 9/11 had never happened the guy would be running as a DEMOCRAT!!

BTW, let's be aware that the cards are stacked against us in many more ways. In the documentary last night it showed the debate between Gore and Bush in 2000 and even though Nader had been pulling hundreds of thousands to rallies all over the country, such as Madison Square Garden, and even though he had a ticket to get into the debate (although not as a participant), the police threatened him with ARREST when he showed up. He had even been invited to do an interview with Fox on-site and the police were literally about to throw him in a squad car!! The Presidential Debates Commission is headed by a former head of the Republican Party and a former head of the Democratic Party and they have created a process that practically assures them that no third party candidate will ever get a chance to debate nationally!

Unless we'd have a candidate like Robert Redford or some other "famous" and well-liked American, there's little chance they would "poll" high enough to get into the debates.

The system is very well rigged now against third parties, including the entire system of computerized voting which is only counted by the machines!!

Please go to YouTube and watch: "Diebold Princeton University".

It's a "fight or flight" situation we're in now. We all know this because we read and do research. We read these pages and write very thoughtful comments.

But sometimes the thought of having a cozy American expatriate enclave in the Bahamas or someplace looks appealing. Hey! I'd live in a community with all you guys (and gals)!

Yet being involved in the good fight to save our Constitution and to be a part of a movement of putting the brakes on this rotten, fascist runaway train sounds like a great use of my life too.

And one last comment. I have been deeply involved in grass roots movements, mostly in Los Angeles. How many different ways can you spell "agent provocateur"?

We always knew they'd been at our meetings when the agenda got scapped somehow or side-tracked off into an area that was totally against our objectives. Then at the end of the night nothing got done except spatting about B.S. We'd sit around having coffee somewhere afterwards wondering, "What happened?! Who were those people?!" Heck! Sometimes I can see them right on these pages!