General Discussion

Ken Burch

(50,254 posts)

4. Poltical parties, by themselves, seldom have core values.

Wed May 2, 2012, 08:52 PM

May 2012

Last edited Wed May 2, 2012, 09:22 PM - Edit history (1)

They exist solely to elect their members to office...most of them don't actually care what those people do in office once they get there, so long as it isn't "risky".

They act on the things people MAKE them act on...either through activism or through mass campaign donations.

Look at how radically different the Democratic Party of today is from the party of 1860.

ALL the change in our party came about due to what it was made to do from outside.

If there'd been no mass movements of the workers and the jobless in 1933, for example, FDR would likely have used the same economic policies Grover Cleveland used. He ONLY became the leader we now revere because of pressure from outside and below.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

51 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

General debate: Do YOU think activist groups can ally with a party yet stay true to themselves? [View all] Ken Burch May 2012 OP

I think either/or propositions are very un-realistic, because they artificially limit the terms and patrice May 2012 #1

That's why I included the part about tradeoffs. Ken Burch May 2012 #5

Re artificially limiting the terms: What about the converse of your question? e.g. patrice May 2012 #2

Poltical parties, by themselves, seldom have core values. Ken Burch May 2012 #4

Okay, so there is the possibility of effective pressure from outside of a party. What about the core patrice May 2012 #7

depends on the Democrat you're talking about. Ken Burch May 2012 #8

So the tradeoffs between business activist groups and the Democratic party more recently included patrice May 2012 #12

So corporate money is like garlic to a vampire? randome May 2012 #13

Personally, I don't think ally = identify, but that's me -AND- it IS necessary to *KNOW* what you're patrice May 2012 #14

They DON'T ignore groups that share the same values. Ken Burch May 2012 #21

There's a balance of individuality:group that is necessary, because being more inclusive can also patrice May 2012 #23

OK, that's a valid concern. Ken Burch May 2012 #15

They are ALL over our Occupy. Doing little of the work and showing up to collect signatures patrice May 2012 #18

I met one of those people...couldn't understand where she was coming from. Ken Burch May 2012 #35

Imagine the threat to labor organizers that their presence poses. All it would take patrice May 2012 #40

A couple of links related to this question: patrice May 2012 #17

My groups linked with whoever did what we believed. ASF, SWP, Dem, whatever. freshwest May 2012 #3

ASF? what the heck was that? Ken Burch May 2012 #10

They do it all the time in real democracies rucky May 2012 #6

Like Britain in the Nineties? Where the almost the entire activist Left shuttered its operations Ken Burch May 2012 #9

And now that you're aware of that possibility... randome May 2012 #11

That's my intent Ken Burch May 2012 #16

The left here in the US RobertEarl May 2012 #19

Well put. Ken Burch May 2012 #20

So how does that relate to the issues usually associated with "States' Rights"? patrice May 2012 #22

It would involve a complete overhaul of the nature of local and regional governance Ken Burch May 2012 #24

And a BIG response to what we have learned, now, is an infatuation with Anarchy. patrice May 2012 #27

I don't favor "Anarchy", or even anarchism(the two things AREN'T the same, btw) Ken Burch May 2012 #31

An orienting point can be different things to different people. I was referring to the patrice May 2012 #36

Sounds like your vision is RobertEarl May 2012 #29

I suppose it's influenced by that, and also by the African village forms of governance Ken Burch May 2012 #33

Internet could facilitate that nationally RobertEarl May 2012 #37

It would be better Ken Burch May 2012 #42

The problem is your view sometime cries wolf when there are no wolves around. bluestate10 May 2012 #28

It's a view that's naive or manipulative in all of it's, TTE, "If it isn't _________, then it is 0." patrice May 2012 #32

Labour Party =/= Democrats. Why does everyone assume that all Democrats are a bunch of robots??? patrice May 2012 #25

We had the same thing in the U.S. in the Nineties Ken Burch May 2012 #30

I remember. I always hated being around "the party" because it was soooooooooooo clear that patrice May 2012 #34

Why can't Labor be it's own party? That'd be a 3rd party of big enough size to actually matter. patrice May 2012 #41

There's something to be said for the idea. Ken Burch May 2012 #43

There are some stupid people who will turn off at the word Left, but Labor reaches patrice May 2012 #46

Yes. bluestate10 May 2012 #26

Eh?? RobertEarl May 2012 #38

I suppose you would have to say that Martin Luther King allied with the Democrats JDPriestly May 2012 #39

King made a temporary, tactical alliance, but he mainly his distance from the party. Ken Burch May 2012 #45

Generally, that is the way it works with the Democratic Party. JDPriestly May 2012 #51

not Occupy. U4ikLefty May 2012 #44

No. I think they have grow large enough that the party allies with *them*. Marr May 2012 #47

No, but individual people who are members of both activists and parties-- eridani May 2012 #48

Wasn't saying they weren't Ken Burch May 2012 #49

Yeah, I suspected as much. I really work at keeping the two roles separate, though eridani May 2012 #50