Putting the politics of Sanders, Warren and Ocasio-Cortez in an historical perspective

[billpolonsky]

"Lazy journalists, milquetoast Democratic strategists, and citizens of curiosity and conscience should take note that the illuminative story of domestic politics is not how the prominence of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, or the popularity of Warren and Sanders, is proof that the Democratic Party has drifted off the edge of the “far left,” but that the far right has so thoroughly succeeded in moving the country’s political culture away from the center that the moderate policies of the 1970s now apparently resemble Fidel Castro’s revolutionary agenda."

[link:https://www.salon.com/2019/10/26/the-conservatism-of-bernie-sanders-elizabeth-warren-and-alexandria-ocasio-cortez/?fbclid=IwAR077P6lIvrbwFQjQmZ5R_-qnlq1O_OkGbq0rBjzawb7Uekz0-WXQtXxE2Y|

[guillaumeb]

1. Welcome to DU, and recommended.

The far right has succeeded in moving the boundaries of what is considered acceptable debate.

[Ninga]

2. Important relevant article. Recommend distribution far and wide.

How Do We Know Where To Go - If We Don’t Know Where We Have Been?

[redqueen]

3. K&R

Must say I've noticed an odd trend here, haven't seen it elsewhere yet.

Some seem to be claiming that there's no such thing as moderate democrats, that they're all liberals, and that anyone saying otherwise is 'suspicious', 'a liar', etc.

Quite bizarre.

[George II]

4. I'm not going to read that article, but is it explained what the writer thinks...

..."Fidel Castro’s revolutionary agenda" really is? Clearly most people of the United States misunderstood his "revolutionary agenda" during that revolution because we overwhelmingly supported Castro in his battle against Batista. It was only after his victory and he was installed as President of Cuba that we realized what his TRUE revolutionary agenda was. It was nowhere near what we thought we were supporting prior to 1959.

[Buzz cook]

5. History has a liberal bias. nt

.

[beastie boy]

6. Excellent point. The question is, how do we move back to what used to be the center?

I only see one way to do this: win elections. It is clear that in the present political climate, AOC, Warren and Sanders cannot do it by themselves. They need way more like-minded colleagues to move the post. It may take years, if not decades, to get enough momentum on their side.

I say "their side" because I disagree with their methods, although not their sentiments, in achieving results. Bernie's rhetorical revolution looks more and more like practical evolution with each passing year. In the mean time, we are losing critical ground to the above mentioned right wingers who keep moving the country's political culture to the right, for many years, if not decades, to come. It is precisely because of this continuing movement to the right, not the lofty goals espoused to by the revolutionaries, that the idea of a revolution is impractical, if not disastrous. We are all witness to how painfully difficult it is to regain the lost ground. The Supreme Court losses alone have set us back generations.

This is why I am a big advocate of moderate incrementalism. Incrementalism implies movement forward. And it seems to me a surer, quicker and more realistic way to move the post back to the left than to keep watching the continued movement of the post to the right.

[Hortensis]

7. Good right-left analysis, but why the hell ascribe values to mainstream Dems

THEN spend the rest of the article contradicting that by insisting only a few off on the farthest left of our caucuses are today's Only True Democrats?

This article's its own oxymoron, but it's worth reading about how goals and values attacked by the right as radical (nothing new about that) have long been held and practiced by Democrats.

Btw, this KIND of behavior, attacking the large Democratic majority instead of uniting to further the claimed goals, is EXACTLY why I don't support those who behave this way. It's not the issue positions, it's the behaviors that sabotage those very goals.

I read history too, and regardless of nation, this wired-in need to attack those who hold power on the left and inability to work with them is the precise reason they virtually always fail to achieve their avowed goals. Our nation's big progressive advances have always been achieved by Democrats, usually against their opposition and in spite of them. Like the New Deal and the still-embattled ACA.

It's also why the parties they've occasionally managed to form in this country always fell apart: same behavior on a smaller scale and disagreements constantly turned into litmus tests and circular firing squads.

Btw, note that the Working Families Party is emphatically not made up of these sorts. They promote labor right and progressive values. But they seldom run their own candidates since they're so small and instead endorse Democratic candidates who best reflect their values and goals, this time Elizabeth Warren for president.

[Uncle Joe]

8. Kicked and recommended

Thanks for the thread billpolonsky.