Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Stop Complaining About Right-Wing Protests! The Left Should Be (Re)Learning How It's Done
OMG! Those protesters showing up at Democratic "town meetings" to promote the president's health care "reform" program are being bused in from out of town?
Scandal! Que horrible! (Gasp!)
But wait! That's exactly what we on the left always did when we held demonstrations--at least if we could. Who in the trade union movement hasn't called on fellow workers in other unions to join them in rallies during struggles with an employer, or asked them to join sparse picket-lines? Who hasn't pulled out the stops trying to get people from other cities to attend a local protest?
Okay, if it were shown that the Republicans were hiring fake protesters to go to those Democratic pep rallies to mess them up, as was done during the 2000 Florida vote recount, there'd be a good investigative story, but from the righteous if ignorant anger that is being expressed by the tea-baggers and anti-government types that I've seen in news reports, these seem like legitimate right-wing cranks, who are willing to be rallied to the cause of opposing what they see as a socialist plot. Never mind that you've got ignorant numbskulls demanding that Democrats in Congress "Keep your government hands off my Medicare!" or that you've got right-wing protesters in their 70's who are all on Medicare irrationally shouting "Keep government out of health care!" The point is that confused and ignorant or not, these people are willing to make the effort to travel fair distances to make their voices heard, and they're willing to stand up, shout, and even scuffle for the chance to make their point.
It's not as if Democrats haven't gone to great length to fill those same halls with earnest supporters.
The
real question is why is the left in the US so goddamned polite and domesticated
that these Right Wing cranks look positively rowdy.
Back
in the late 1950s and the 1960s, the Civil Rights movement wasn't
polite and domesticated. It brought activists to events in the Deep
South all the way from New York and Boston. Its members rallied in the
thousands to shut down segregated public and even private institutions.
Its activists occupied buildings on university campuses, boldly confronting
police and police dogs and armed men in white robes.
In the late 1960s and early 1970s, anti-war protesters in turn shut down recruiting and induction centers, destroyed draft board records, tried to close down Washington, DC, got arrested in the hundreds, incited soldiers to desert and then helped hide them from the law, exposed the 1968 Democratic Convention as a farce, and faced down armed police and soldiers repeatedly, at one point in 1970 closing down the nation's campuses in a national student strike when soldiers shot and killed four unarmed students at Kent State University.
Years earlier, when workers were being abused, they occupied factories, forcibly shutting them down with sit-down strikes, battled Pinkerton detectives and armed National Guard forces, and set up tent cities in Washington to make themselves heard.
And they won great victories.
Where is that passion today? For the most part, the left, in all its various guises--environmentalists, labor unions, civil rights advocates, health care reform advocates, anti-war activists--have become neutered office-chair potatoes, sending canned emails to their elected representatives or to the White House, occasionally marching politely inside of pre-approved, permitted and police-prescribed routes, and attending sponsored events like the current round of town meetings, perhaps to raise polite objections to aspects of a proposed piece of legislation.
The agenda of the left in today's America is being written not by uncompromising radicals in the street as in earlier decades of struggle, but by the bought-and-paid Democrats in Washington. The left, such as it is, has become simply a reactive force, trying to make discrete little improvements in the truly horrible legislation--health care "reform," cap-and-trade, the Employee Not-So-Free Choice Act, continued Iraq and Afghanistan War funding bills--that is being offered by a wholly corrupt Washington in thrall to corporate lobbyists.
We all need to take a lesson from the Right, and from those lusty, cantankerous folks who are raising hell at those pathetic "town meetings."
How can it be that 10 percent of American workers don't have a job, and that the government is expecting that number to keep rising for another year or more, or that another 7 percent have either given up even trying to find a job, or have taken part-time work in desperation, and yet we have not had one mass protest in Washington demanding public jobs for the jobless!
How can it be that the country has been mired in two wars now for eight years, and we haven't had a million people storming the Pentagon to shut it down (or at least levitate it)!
How can it be that we have 49 million Americans who can't even afford to see a doctor when they're sick, and we're talking about a health care "reform" plan that not only won't fix the problem, but will actually end up costing us all $600 billion over 10 years without solving it! And we just write letters to Congress! Why aren't we liberating hospitals and opening them up to the uninsured?
How can it be that the ice cap at the North Pole is actually disappearing, and the whole arctic tundra across Canada, Alaska and Siberia is starting to boil with the release of prehistoric methane trapped under now-melting permafrost, threatening the very lives of our grandchildren, and we're calmly watching as even the Obama administration's pathetic "cap-and-trade" legislation gets stalled by coal-state Democrats! Why aren't we on the left lying down on the tracks to block the coal trains, or tearing up those tracks!
Where is the passion and commitment we once had?
It all seems to be on the Right these days.
- Posted in




107 Comments so far
Show AllCool Dave , I'm ready bro! Lets set it up, a Levitate the Pentagon whirled peas rally! Millions of meditators peasfully reapeating thier jappa mantras and raising the whole complex a few feet in the air! We can do it,I bet that would make the evening news! Far out! peas in and out
Yes! I would be willing to travel to DC (from Sacramento) to attend an organized rally/march in favor of single-payer, campaign finance, leaving Iraq/Afghanistan, or a number of other issues that we progressives are passionate about but continually suckered on by the Dems. I think organizing and attending peaceful protest marches (not silent ones, though; it's imperative that our voices be heard now) is a much better use of our passion than sniping at each other on CD comment forums. Armey's FreedomWorks, is planning a Sept. 12 "Taxpayer March on DC," and among their issues is Obama and the Dems' attempt to "socialize" our health care system. Their goal is to kill the single-payer option, once and for all, and I'm sure the insurance cos. and big Pharma couldn't be happier about it. I am wondering what MoveOn.org is up to these days? I know there's a movie on them coming out, which is very nice for them, but are they organizing anything like Armey's group? They claim on their website to have 5 million members. That's a lot of potential people power, but what are they doing with it lately?
I don't think traveling to DC alone will work. We need to decentralize our protesting by hitting our pols in our districts and state capitals. As for moveon.org, they're busy worrying about Lou Dobbs on the birther issue than they are on paying attention to Main Street issues.
Well, given that I live in the (rather conservative, unfortunately) capital city of the country's most populous state, I guess that's a good place to start. Any other Sacramento/north central valley liberals out there that are organizing and want some help?
The key to winning is breaking the ideology down into issues and uniting by issues. Let's take an example. You would be surprised as to how many conservatives who rail against gun control or even abortion actually support single payer health care. Get them on the Main Street issues and try to avoid the social issues. I can't guarantee success 100% but I think that this would increase the chances of winning our causes no matter which party is in office.
The author should speak for himself. He's the one who fights against true progressives and liberals. Let's see him read today's article by Chris Hedges "Nader Was Right: Liberals are Going Nowhere With Obama" and see if he apologizes to Nader, Mckinney, Sheehan, etc ...
Speaking of health care, Obamacare will only guarantee more uninsured people. Let's see this author go right ahead and call us Republicans for opposing Obamacare but supporting single payer.
Ditto. It is hilariously ironic that a right of center Obama apologist lecture those to the left of the Democratic party on values.
Yawn!
Give it a rest.
Maybe someone should inform "Counterpunch"--the Leftest of the lot, that they are printing Obama apologists and worse, by god, the likes of Paul Craig Roberts, formerly of the Reagan administration.
Get off your high horse--it is easy to strut your told-ya-sos in retrospect but it sounds like nyah-nyah at this point in time.
And the author wonders why, with this petty vindictiveness and demands for purity, progressives can't get their act together.
With thei kind of reception, why should anyone shift their views--only to be pelted with oneupmanship barbs.
You don’t like it leave.
Your self-righteousness is appalling and your ignorance of the issues astonishing in scope. What is CD to you, Vern, a little club for elites married to the status quo? A mutual admiration society where we all join hand a dance merrily around the Mulberry Tree?
Before pontificating about “purity” you might ask yourself if species extinction falls under your rubric of purity: species loss is an absolute concept. Once it is gone, we will never see it again. And Obama's policies are inimical to the earth community of beings. Or you might want to ask if all the non combatants in Pakistan or Afghanistan killed by unmanned drones by Obama's policies of covert strikes if their loss of family members, including numerous children is pure enough to meet your less humanistic criteria for validity? Of course, it is not your ass or those close to you on the line, or paying the price, is it?
How wonderful it must be for your ilk to have the luxury of an anti-septic view of life, while living in suburbia with a nice little house on Sunny Side Street without fear of being blasted out of existence. Or never seeing you kids again after sending them to school.
Instead go about your status quo life inching down the highway in your mettle coffin and play sixties tunes.
"You don’t like it leave"
Yes, as I was saying.
Does Ron Paul have a better plan?
On what issue are you referring to because it depends? On some issues such as wars and bailing out Wall $treet, Paul is actually to the left of Obama. On health care, I doubt he supports single payer but I hear that based on his experience as a doctor, he supports helping out alternative practioners and leveling the playing field for them to compete with the for-profit weasels. He also supports legalizing hemp and removing the persecuting regulations against small farmers. I am skittish about his position on women's reproductive rights and on some of the race issues. Overall though, he's an ok mix.
Jennifer--
Ron Paul is a right-wing crank on nearly every economic and social issue. He would privatize the friggin sidewalks if he had the chance.
Don't go there.
vanmungo, I'm aware of his positions on the economy and I definitely don't agree with most of them. I do agree with his idea of abolishing the fed though in addition to his opposition to "free" trade, corporate welfare, and bailing out Wall $treet. I was comparing Paul to Obama. If I had to pick between Paul and Kucinich or Paul and Nader, I would defintely choose the latter over Paul in both cases. As for privatizing sidewalks, it's already well on its way. First they defund them, then repairing and maintenance is outsourced to a contractor.
Yeah, a real prince-
http://www.povertyscorecard.org/person/481/
That's it? What about legalizing industrial hemp and helping the small farmers? That doesn't count in fighting the war against poverty? I didn't say I fully agree with Paul. He just sounds more liberal than Obama when one adds up his positions but I suppose the definition of liberal varies from person to person.
no
If the writer bothered to read anything I've written on healthcare--including anything published by me here by CD, he'd know I'm totally an advocate of single-payer, and have been for years. I have also been criticising Obamacare from day one.
I don't call anyone a Republican for opposing Obamacare. I agree with Chris Hedges, and I like Ralph Nader.
If you go back to what I wrote about Obama, I said, back in October, that it was worth voting for the guy, with eyes wide open, because there was a chance that, if Americans and particularly the broad left, organized to pressure him, he could be made to act in progressive ways. I don't even know if I was wrong, because the left never did organize to pressure Obama and the Democrats. For the most part, progressive organzations, or organizations that at least call themselves progressive, from Move-On to the union movement to United for Peace and Justice, have become apoligists for Obama and the Democrats. That's no way to win progressive battles.
Obama is a shill for corporate insterests. It is no surprise, but I would still say that there was a good reason to hope at least that those who voted for him, including the 95 percent of African American voters, the majority of working class Americans, the majority of Latino voters, the majority of women, the majority of young people, and most self-described leftists and progressives, would hold his feet to the fire. They/we have not done that. And it is precisely that which i, Ralph and Chris are really talking about.
The author's ad hominem is just childish crap, frankly. It belongs in the playground, not in CD.
The challenge is not to say who had Obama pegged correctly last Fall (if you always say it's going to rain, and it rains, that doesn't make you a smarter forecaster, dude). The challenge is how shift the court of American corporatization.
Visit Dave Lindorff's website at www.thiscantbehappening.net
"that it was worth voting for the guy, with eyes wide open, because there was a chance that, if Americans and particularly the broad left, organized to pressure him, he could be made to act in progressive ways. I don't even know if I was wrong, because the left never did organize to pressure Obama and the Democrats."
Oh great ! In other words, pay our stupid taxes and do their dirty work? NO NO NO ! A leader is one who L-E-A-D-S, not some weasel who says "makes me do it" and then betrays the voters by siding with the corporate elites. What Obama is doing is COWARDICE. ARRRGH !
"I would still say that there was a good reason to hope at least that those who voted for him, including the 95 percent of African American voters, the majority of working class Americans, the majority of Latino voters, the majority of women, the majority of young people, and most self-described leftists and progressives, would hold his feet to the fire. They/we have not done that."
Wait until the 2010 and 2012 elections. It will happen although I'll hate it as much that we're stuck with Republicans all over again unless we can get enough 3rd party candidates all over the country to throw enough of both parties out of office.
MR. Lindorff...
I really appreciate your comment... And I agree with most of what you say...
During election time... Everyone seems to go kinda crazy...
Either by carrying on the contradictory beliefs of voting for someone who is 99% against the people's interests in the hope of that 1%...
or by voting for a man or woman of integrity and principle who most people have deemed "unelectable"...
I guess it is really a matter of picking your poison... For the system was designed to keep the status quo in favor of the wealthy elite...
Me personally... I'd rather order a local, organic IPA and have the waitress not bring it, rather than drinking a warm can of Bud Light in the hope that I will become a chick-magnet, like the corporate advertisements tell me it will do...
It doesn't matter that Bud Light is the most popular beer in America... It is the same formula as Coors Light...
just different packaging and marketing for a different target demographic... How about that "Beer Summit" in the White House...?
"Everyone seems to go kinda crazy...
Either by carrying on the contradictory beliefs of voting for someone who is 99% against the people's interests in the hope of that 1%...
or by voting for a man or woman of integrity and principle who most people have deemed "unelectable"..."
Oh yeah. I go crazy voting on the issues and not on corporate written polls, faux "personality", "electibility", etc ... There is nothing crazy about voting for a man or woman of integrity and principle. Like Eugene Debs would say "I'd rather vote for what I want and not get it than vote for something I don't want and get it."
Ahh... So you got my joke...? No...?
I agree with you that the Green Party is the way to go...
I voted for McKinney myself...
My point is that there are two kinds of crazy...
Crazy people who vote Dem thinking they are "less evil"...
And crazy people who think that McKinney, et al are "unelectable"... Who then vote Dem because of that myth....
I don't think actually voting for 3rd parties is crazy, but that thinking that they are "unelectable" is what is crazy...
Ack, you got me. I thought Mckinney was cool too. Would have voted for her but I didn't know her on some issues plus I would have to do a write in. I hope she's doing okay. I felt sad for what Israel did to her.
She is an awsome woman. My choice too...until Sarah Palin entered the race. I caved and voted obama not because I hit the hope dope...but because McCain and Palin were too much for me even to imagine.
Where's your fire, Dave? The one you're going to "hold his feet to?" Our "leaders," Dem and Rep alike, have gotten very good at ignoring our letters, phone calls, and polite demonstrations. They really don't care, because people like you will vote for them anyway, and they know that. So they can rake in that corporate money, then count on your support - just on the off chance they might be not so bad as a Republican.
Granted, fire to the feet is the point of your article. I absolutely agree. To a point, the wingers tearing up the town halls are a model to us all. In fact, I've done that. The topic was impeachment, back when it mattered, and the victim was Peter DeFazio. He's a very skillful politician, works a room like nobody's business, but he lost control of that one. Then he changed his position - not that it mattered in the end. (To be clear: we were not threatening. We stayed in our seats and only yelled at him when he wouldn't call on us - or anyone on our side of the room. Pretty funny, that. And when he lied; I caught him on one and called him on it. And we let others speak. But he didn't have control, and I don't think he enjoyed it. He got the point, though.)
To a degree, we don't see the kind of insurrectionary politics we saw in the 60's and 70's because the authorities are prepared to be much more severe. In that sense, we're much further into outright fascism than we were then. Our politics has moved only to the Right since McGovern lost in 1972 - sabotaged by the Democratic Party bureaucracy. Doesn't that mean we need to completely rethink our strategy?
The other reason we don't see genuinely radical politics, anti-war, pro-single-payer, or any other kind, is because they're forever co-opted by Democratic Presidential campaigns. Then the antiwar movement winds up voting for pro-war Kerry, or the Left winds up voting for Obama, "a shill for corporate interests." Do you really think that's a coincidence? Looks like a plan to me, and very effective. In any case, the results are very, very clear: we now have a Democratic president way to the right of Nixon or even Reagan; one who sustains every Bush policy that really matters, and extends them.
The problem is, we can't really "hold their feet to the fire" AFTER the election. The time we have leverage is BEFORE the election. And that's when most of us chickened out.
"Progressive Democrats" are very fond of saying Democrats in Congress or the White House are "gutless." They need to "grow a spine." (False, but I'll get back to that.) How can you expect them to have "guts," when you don't at the ballot box? We hear endless whining about "OoooH, a big, bad Republican might get elected." (Boo!) Yeah, they do, only they call themselves Democrats. You won't get a better world unless you buck up and, well, grow a spine. Vote for someone who reflects your values and your self-interest. Even if they don't win, at least the politicians will know how they can get your vote.
Why the "moderates" aren't "gutless:" in the first place, it takes guts for a politician to defy their constituents. Consider the vote for the first bailout: letters 80 to one against it, but it passed. That's courage. Second, this assumes they secretly agree with you, but don't have the "guts" to vote that way. Why would you think that? Words lie, actions tell the truth: only their record tells you their real position. So they aren't "gutless," just crooked. Vote for someone better.
We all know, at this point, where "lesser evil" voting and "taking over the Democratic Party from the grassroots" leads us. Time to try something new, like the Icelanders. In Iceland, the Greens are now a major party, and share the government with the Social Democrats. We can learn from Iceland.
Charles,
Glad to hear that you were able to rattle Rep. Peter DeFazio at one of this town hall meetings. When I tried that in Eugene a while back, over the wars, I didn't get any support from the audience. Everyone here thinks you have to be polite all the time, because, gee, that's the liberal middle-class definition of democracy.
There is no democracy at DeFazio's meetings. There is no microphone for the audience and you're only supposed to ask questions, if you can get him to call on you. Then he answers the questions at great length, thus neatly reducing their number. It's the old talk-them-to-death trick that bureaucrats use to control a meeting and avoid dealing with the audience's issues. DeFazio loves the sound of his own voice, and he doesn't listen. He thinks he's the expert, so he's going to explain everything to us.
It's no wonder that people are getting frustrated at not being heard, and are getting rowdy. I wish we would.
I agree with you that the only way we'll ever have any impact on government policy is by refusing to vote for anyone who doesn't represent our basic values. Which means we should not vote for Obama or DeFazio. With the most recent supplemental and Defense Dept. appropriations bills, DeFazio's yes-no score on the last 13 war funding bills is now 8-5. http://tinyurl.com/warfunding
I'll be at his Aug. 18 Eugene meeting, standing up, holding a sign that says "Single payer now!" I figure that's the best way to be heard. I wonder if anyone else will stand up with me?
Lynn Porter
Pissing matches about who supported who in '08 will not get us anywhere, and we cannot blow off half of the population who supported Obama. Maybe the next time, the progressive left can actually run ONE candidate and pool their resources, and maybe Nader can step aside and use his resources and wisdom to support a fresh face. I voted for McKinney in 2008 and right now, it is even more clear that we need to form a viable third party within the next couple of years, but that is not going to happen tomorrow.
I am glad that the author wrote this article, thought that I was going to have to, but I am glad that someone else did. But it needs to be pointed out that the progressive Left did not get this timid and ultra-polite overnight. This started in 2000 when Gore "lost" the election to a moron because Gore himself was being a moron, the election was rigged in FL, and Nader was WRONGLY blamed for Bush getting to the White House. The progressive Left internalized the whipping that the neo-liberals gave Nader, who took the heat for all of us in 2000, and turned against not only Nader, but the idea of a political party and movement independent from the Democrats.
In 2006, I ran as state delegate as a Green to complement the underfunded, under-manned/womaned, but still strong campaign of Green Gubernatorial candidate Ed Boyd. At the debates against the Democratic incumbents, myself and another Green candidate went in, presented the facts, was clear about who was screwing who, and while we received compliments and support from much of the audience, the state Greens bitched and moaned that we were being "too negative" and "be nice and we'll get IRV" "we'll get this, that, etc". We lost votes at nomination time, and we easily could have lost the nomination if a few more people bought into this mentality. There are many other stories like this that occurred with other people and other groups, it does not matter who the individuals are, that is irrelevant, but what matters is that when one organizes a protest or an action to truly hold a politician accountable and the word gets out to thousands of people who are supposed to be "radical" and only five show up time and time and time again, you have a problem that is too widespread to ignore.
So much of today's Left is afraid of clarity, standing up in the middle of a room and uttering a declarative sentence is considered a hostile act. I am tired of hearing a bout "civility" and "politeness" two traits that continue to hold us back: nothing has ever been won by being civil. Look at the protest signs, even they speak in the passive: 'Bring the troops home" not wanting to blame anyone. Also, the Left ties itself up with process: consensus voting, decentralization. I have seen groups of three and four get a hell of a lot more done than organizations that do this process stuff all day. Even though the Right protestors are ill-informed, I respect their organizing tactics, they do not tie themselves up with suck inane bullshit like consensus and decentralization that stems from extreme individualism, which is improtant, but should not be a prioity in political decisions, the right-wingers, they go in and do it. I hate Nike, but the motto, 'Just do it" needs to be adopted by those who want true progressive change.
I also think that the internet has created a lot of inertia amongst many of these people, these forums are good for sharpening your politics and discussion, but they should be used as springboards to action, not as a way just to type and bitch. 3% blogging, 97% action.
Pissing matches about who supported who in '08 will not get us anywhere, and we cannot blow off half of the population who supported Obama. Maybe the next time, the progressive left can actually run ONE candidate and pool their resources, and maybe Nader can step aside and use his resources and wisdom to support a fresh face. I voted for McKinney in 2008 and right now, it is even more clear that we need to form a viable third party within the next couple of years, but that is not going to happen tomorrow.
I am glad that the author wrote this article, thought that I was going to have to, but I am glad that someone else did. But it needs to be pointed out that the progressive Left did not get this timid and ultra-polite overnight. This started in 2000 when Gore "lost" the election to a moron because Gore himself was being a moron, the election was rigged in FL, and Nader was WRONGLY blamed for Bush getting to the White House. The progressive Left internalized the whipping that the neo-liberals gave Nader, who took the heat for all of us in 2000, and turned against not only Nader, but the idea of a political party and movement independent from the Democrats.
In 2006, I ran as state delegate as a Green to complement the underfunded, under-manned/womaned, but still strong campaign of Green Gubernatorial candidate Ed Boyd. At the debates against the Democratic incumbents, myself and another Green candidate went in, presented the facts, was clear about who was screwing who, and while we received compliments and support from much of the audience, the state Greens bitched and moaned that we were being "too negative" and "be nice and we'll get IRV" "we'll get this, that, etc". We lost votes at nomination time, and we easily could have lost the nomination if a few more people bought into this mentality. There are many other stories like this that occurred with other people and other groups, it does not matter who the individuals are, that is irrelevant, but what matters is that when one organizes a protest or an action to truly hold a politician accountable and the word gets out to thousands of people who are supposed to be "radical" and only five show up time and time and time again, you have a problem that is too widespread to ignore.
So much of today's Left is afraid of clarity, standing up in the middle of a room and uttering a declarative sentence is considered a hostile act. I am tired of hearing a bout "civility" and "politeness" two traits that continue to hold us back: nothing has ever been won by being civil. Look at the protest signs, even they speak in the passive: 'Bring the troops home" not wanting to blame anyone. Also, the Left ties itself up with process: consensus voting, decentralization. I have seen groups of three and four get a hell of a lot more done than organizations that do this process stuff all day. Even though the Right protestors are ill-informed, I respect their organizing tactics, they do not tie themselves up with suck inane bullshit like consensus and decentralization that stems from extreme individualism, which is improtant, but should not be a prioity in political decisions, the right-wingers, they go in and do it. I hate Nike, but the motto, 'Just do it" needs to be adopted by those who want true progressive change.
I also think that the internet has created a lot of inertia amongst many of these people, these forums are good for sharpening your politics and discussion, but they should be used as springboards to action, not as a way just to type and bitch. 3% blogging, 97% action.
Dave is right we have become very apathetic to a dangerously destructive level. However, the working class hasn’t become apathetic over night it took decades of abuse by the rich, exploitation by the same educators and public officials they trusted and let’s not forget the outright theft by the government under the code “stimulus package”. Dave, it isn’t that they lost their passion its simply that it was gradually taken away, it wont be until people are homeless and hungry that they wont truly raise up and fight for what is rightfully their’s.
True, but I wouldn't depend on the homeless and hungry to rise up. They alone will not save us.
When you are Homeless and hungry you spend most of your time looking for your next place to eat and sleep.
If the left couldn’t get their shit together under the reign of Bush / Cheney why the F do you think they are going to rise up and storm the gates of power now?...Oh, wait a minute, the left did get their shit together and attended truly massive rallies against the invasion of Iraq, but due to America’s corporate owned media which either refused to cover the events or out and out lied about the number of protesters, it had virtually no impact.
Secondly do you remember New Orleans in the aftermath of Katrina? In retrospect the government of the United States during the era of Bush / Cheney had no qualms what so ever in letting thousands of Americans die to advance their political goals, namely the destruction of a very democratic stronghold in the middle of the very red Deep South.
And let us examine the “passion of the rightwing protesters”, yes they are passionate, but their passion is based on lies about what the health reform bills would do. Rightwing AM talk radio has been filled with republican talking points that health reform would require small businesses to pay the healthcare bills of their employees, that health services will be withheld from the elderly, that there will be long waiting periods to receive health services, hospitals would be required to treat illegal aliens for no charge and on and on and on.
Secondly, the amount of coverage the little handfull of these protesters received from America’s corporate owned media is 20 times what the coverage of protests against the Iraq war received.
Finally, if a liberal does protest at a republican meeting he is roughly removed from the venue, handcuffed, arrested, taken to jail, booked, held for up to 72 hours, then he has to appear in court and hire a lawyer to have the charges dropped.
It's true. A few crackpot right wingers act out at a couple of town meetings and its all over the media. Millions rally against war and there's no coverage. That about sums up where the country is these days. It doesn't pay to fight the right wingers, but it can pay to fight the Democrats. If the left stops voting for them, they will have a serious problem. Put effort where it might pay off. Turn the fight against the Democrats. Let them fight the Republicans. We are wasting our time if we do. But we can be effective against the Democrats and the rest of the pseudo-liberals.
The dems should have continued to hold their town meetings except change the name to “A conversation with Congressman (fill in the blank), except they should have held them in rented venues like hotel conference rooms.
Then they should have hired a few burley private security goons.
When the republican rabble rousers started shouting they would be told to quiet down, ask civil questions and wait their turn. When they did not follow these instructions they could have been tossed out of THE PRIVATE FACILITY FOR TRESPASSING and held to account in either civil court for damages or criminal court should they have resisted eviction.
Heck, the media might even cover it, up to the point the rabble got tossed out on their rear end.
As to your idea of fighting against the dems, I'd be more than happy to lead the chant "Bayh is a DINO" at his next Indiana rally.
YES!
You are so right!!
Lindorff writes about this as if we have a level playing field.
We don't!!
Progressive protests are ignored at the front end, when a few mentions of an upcoming event would help enormously in giving us a good turnout.
And after the event (rally, street march- whatever) is underway, we are ignored again, or misrepresented in some twisted way: serious underestimates of our crowd sizes, a lack of respectful, and nuanced stories about the event and related issues.
Sports (baseball, football) are covered in the major news media with much more sensitivity and complexity than the important political issues that we on the left would like more people to know about!
Another concern: the repercussions for participating in street protests and demonstrations are a lot more severe for leftists.
The ones disrupting the Town Halls now are being treated very gently as far as being tear gassed, pepper sprayed, being dragged out of the hall and arrested.
A blatant and glaring difference.
An honest comparison between the masses roused by Limbaugh and friends and the work we lefties do to do to get a decent rally organized is so monumental that it would take pages and pages to even describe it.
The imbalance in treatment and available resources begins a long time before the event reaches the public airwaves, too. For example, I only WISH I had an audience of millions listening to daily arguments on ending the occupation of Iraq, or in favor of having single payer health care, (name your issue).
If we are lucky, and work hard at it, we lefty organizers can reach a few thousand people.
Compound these basic distinctions (the difference between right-wing rallies and left ones) by several fold, and huge prejudices about who gets access and who gets reported on are revealed.
These points are rarely acknowledged, for some reason.
Even here on CD.
Makes me think few CD'ers have ever done any actual grassroots organizing.
These are strange, scary times - scary, because right wing haters are turning into angry mobs at the behest of dangerous demagogues like Limbaugh, Palin, O'Reilly and Beck; and strange, because I'm actually finding common ground with these mobs on a couple of issues, although for different reasons. I oppose the bailout of Wall Street and the trillions being poured down the hole via the Federal Reserve because I don't want the government rewarding Wall Street banksters for their criminality and greed while doing nothing for the working class and homeowners who were defrauded by predatory lenders. I oppose health care “reform” because it is not single payer but instead a very poor substitute that will only enrich Big Pharma and the health insurance industry and, just as bad, force people to buy health insurance in this rigged game. I dislike and distrust Obama because he's a shill for Wall Street who hoodwinked a whole generation of first time voters, liberals, progressives, the poor, immigrants, African Americans, the gay community, anti-war protesters and other wishful thinkers into believing (or at least hoping) he would serve the people when in fact he serves only his corporate masters.
As for these town hall protests, the tea baggers, birthers and other assorted crazies scare the heck out of me. But like this article says, at least they have the balls to mobilize, while those on the left are sitting on their hands, suffering in relative silence. How do you fight for what you believe in (on the left) when there is no one in Washington representing your interests (except a couple of relatively powerless people such as Denis Kucinich and Bernie Sanders)? Like George Carlin said, the game is rigged. I believe that a revolution or civil war is brewing, but feel I have no dog in this fight because I don't support any of them.
So true.
There is opportunity for unity there but partisanship keeps people from recognizing their shared interests. But my gawd, so many leftists here scorn progressives who didn't demonstrate the proper allegiances - do you think they would mix with angry conservatives whose anger is channeled by the Right because the Left is so busy opposing them?
They are damn right about the bailouts for Wall St.
anne faith:
Good post: If I remember correctly, you and I and others on CD backed Kucinich for President in 2007 and early 08 before he dropped out of the race and supported Obama, and yet supposedly progressive people were campaigning for either Obama, Clinton, or Edwards, and we kept telling them no, no, no! Those three were part of the duopoly and would continue down the corporate and militaristic path as the Republican Crime Family and the Democratic Party collaborators did, and we were constantly told Dennis couldn't win.
The same Dems supporting Clinton or Obama, and eventually Obama when he was selected as the D's candidate, are now complaining that he's following in Bush's footsteps, etc. Kucinich was/is the man for constructive and progressive change we so desperately needed, but the ruling-elite made him persona non grata in MSM and those phony non-debates on television.
If Americans only had the courage to vote for a Kucinich, a McKinney (I proudly voted for Cynthia), a Gravel, or a Nader, we wouldn't be in such a mess.
And then we have masses of ignorant people like the tea baggers, the birthers, and other assorted crazies as you mentioned easily manipulated by big money to disrupt these town hall meetings over health care. The beginnings of "storm trooper" tactics in the U.S. are evident. Obama is just a front man playing his part to appease the masses while they are getting screwed. Anne, at least we didn't fall for the bait.
and yet Kucinich ultimately supported Obama.
Don't you think then that he should be ostricized?
To be sure, I was very disappointed when Kucinich supported Obama, succumbing to the lesser of two evils baloney.
Many on the left have asked him to leave the Democratic Party but for whatever his reasons, he is adamant about staying put.
Hi Peaceman. Nice to hear from a kindred spirit. You did indeed remember correctly. I love Dennis and always will. I'll never know what he was thinking when he told his supporters to go for Obama on the second ballot in Iowa; my take on it at the time was that he considered Obama the least of evils compared to Clinton and Edwards. (I wonder if he knew about the powderkeg lurking in the Edwards campaign regarding Edwards' mistress, Rielle, or just plain didn't like Edwards after he and Clinton tried to get Dennis excluded from the debates.) Seems like ancient history now. I knew Obama was no progressive, but my God! He's turned out to be far, far worse than I ever believed he would be.
Hi Anne: I sure do remember. We were the "fringe element" because we pleaded with our fellow citizens to abandon the one-party duopoly and vote for real change instead of the status quo. You bring up some good points about Obama, but he was put in the limelight by big corporate media for a reason...and it worked! The public was fooled again. The anti-war movement never really mobilized as it should have, but once the Democrats took over, continuing the murder and mayhem agenda abroad for imperialist empire expansion, torture, illegal spying, taxpayer supported mercenaries, now called "contractors" used along with the "troops".....it goes on and on and on, but is acceptable now that the Dems are doing it instead of the Repugs. I met Dennis twice and and share your affection for him!
After Kucinich spent several hours in Congress reading 35 counts of impeachable offenses...actual crimes committed by Bush/Cheney, et al, liberals and progressives waited for Pelosi and Reid to do something and were betrayed again.
And now,we have calculated disruptions at town hall meetings over health care. The country as a whole has sunk to a new low.
Many in our nation find bliss in ignorance, and the ruling class likes it that way. I have to stop writing before my blood pressure rises. Take care.
Aside from the fact that still thinks "the left" has something to do with the Democratic Party...
Lindorff is calling for us to take action.
We can trash him for being in the pocket of the Democratic Party...
But we should still take action!
Has anyone here been to a Town Hall meeting on health care? What did you do? What happened? i'd love to read some direct reporting from CD readers about our experiences in the trenches.
A fist fight started at my Town Hall. It was nothing more than a food fight organized by the religious right. I seen one Cat who is a pastor at an ultra conservative fundamentalist church with his herd of disciples looking more like Gestapo than Christians.
My Democratic congressman is a frigging joke: he refuses to utter the word 'single payer' and he is against public option. No surprise, like Obama, he is up to his neck in big Pharma cash, and for profit insurance.
If you consider yourself "on the left" but are still registered to vote as a Democrat...stop kidding yourself.
It's time to break out (yes, read Chris Hedges today in
Commondreams!)...the exit door has always been open...
it might just take you to a whole new dimension.
let your vote count every day...register Green Party!
Why should I lose my vote for the most progressive Dems in the primaries?
If I am outvoted, I can still vote for any candidate or issue on the ballot and not the "Party".
This system of winner take all has evolved which makes it harder to change than if it was actually set in stone.
3rd parties should at least face reality and adopt tactics to deal with it instead of "pie in the sky" false promises.
it would be more effective if they all requested their members to register in the big parties so that they would have much greater influence in the elections. They should be a base for voter education and lobbying... that is where the power is and the power is continued by the winner take all system.
The system is dependent on activists dividing their power by registering for a party that knows it cannot win but will tell you that if everyone did the same thing, they could win.
3rd parties give false promises and politics needs to be realistic for people to be convinced. When you call them "Sheeple", You won't get their vote.
Now the "3rd parties" only split their power by competing with a few votes among themselves.
I wholeheartedly agree with the "pie in the sky" argument here. If third parties want to prove themselves, they need to start getting candidates to run for school boards, park & rec committees, and the unglamorous positions instead of just going after the presidency every 4 years.
Your arguments would be fine if either party actually represented the vast majority of their constituents. They don't. Both Republicans and Democrats basically represent the same big business interests - not democracy. There is a very low correlation between voting patterns and government policy, yet an almost one-to-one correlation between big investor campaign donors and government policy (see "The Golden Rule" by Thomas Ferguson).
Our current Democratic leadership, has only continued Bush era policies. Gifts to Wall Street have increased, military spending has increased. Both the climate bill and healthcare "reform" bill are looking like solutions that will reward polluters and insurance companies. They will actually make things worse than they are now. It is not because the Democrats don't have a "spine." It's because they don't represent us - and they never have. The historic role of the Democratic Party in American politics is to diffuse, not promote, progressive movements. The reason why we have any progressive legislation is due to massive movements not connected to either corporate party. Note that Roe v Wade, the EPA and OSHA all occurred under a Republican.
People bitch about Right wing propaganda, but it clumsy and obvious. Liberal or "centrist" propaganda is far more pervasive, sophisticated and effective. If you want to know why the Left can't get its act together, it is because, too many on the left are coaxed into the Democratic Party and their "spoiler" arguments. The Democrats are the Sirens singing on the rocks that cause movement after movement to run aground. Don't let yourself be fooled again.
Tom, you say:
"Your arguments would be fine if either party actually represented the vast majority of their constituents. They don't."
If they did why would we need to change that, and there would be no argument.
That is why activists need to show their interest in the big primaries. This new tactic is to improve the representation of both parties. Nader now knows what 3rd parties have been doing is going nowhere.
I suggest a change of tactics. Now that the regular folks on the left and right are getting screwed and angry is the time to make our voices heard at the big party meetings as well as on Common Dreams.
If we are still ignored we can do the protest vote or not vote. If it becomes a tactic, they know that you will vote for someone you want.
You don't have to vote for anyone when you register in a big party, but you get a voice in the direction of it though.
You say: "The reason why we have any progressive legislation is due to massive movements not connected to either corporate party."
But you just contradicted yourself in the second sentence of your statement "Note that Roe v Wade, the EPA and OSHA all occurred under a Republican."
If it feels good to keep doing the same thing over and over and offer false promises, then that is your free choice.
Well, Jim, I don't know what to say. So, I'll let Chris Hedges address the issue from his spot-on article on today's CD:
We must give up the self-delusion that we can influence the power elite from the inside. We must become as militant as those who are seeking our enslavement. If we remain passive as we undergo the largest transference of wealth upward in American history, our open society will die. The working class is being plunged into desperation that will soon rival the misery endured by the working class in China and India. And the Democratic Party, including Obama, is a willing accomplice.
I would hope you can speak for yourself.
I am not suggesting that we try to influence the big parties from only the inside.
We gotta do both.
Also If third parties don't unite, how is it that they will get enough votes to do anything?
What I am suggesting is anything but being Passive. The delusion has been that voting for one of the 3rd parties will save the world.