Why do many self-described moderate or centrist Democrats consistently attack other Dems?

[ConsAreLiars]

In contrast to threads advocating, or warning against, one candidate or another, which come from all the various factions in true circular firing squad fashion, there seem to be a lot of threads whose main purpose is to denounce, criticize, or otherwise attempt to rally DU readers against the "threat" posed by the left side of the party.

They seem to be doing their best to either break up the broad alliance that forms the Democratic Party and to drive out the people's wing, or at least discredit it.

I won't call them conservative disrupters or trolls or insincere. That is the kind of slur they prefer since it is an attack on the character of those who they wish to denounce and has no possibility of being proved or disproved. It just invites a lot of name-calling and holier-Joe-than-thou posturing, and thus furthers the divisiveness, which seems to be the goal of such threads, a goal I don't share.

I'll take them at their words. They honestly believe the "lefties" or whatever label they use are a threat and a danger. But a danger to what? Why do they think the people of the US would be better off with no such voices represented in the Democratic Party or even in this little backwater of DU? Are they worried that greater power of the "left" within the Party will cause some sort of harm? Or are they worried about something other than the common good? I don't get it.

I suspect that, as usual, the answer comes down to different frameworks being used to define and answer the question "Which side are you on?" But I don't want to even guess how they manage to define the "us" vs. "them" in such a way that prompts them to denounce the populist wing of the party as the enemy.

Maybe they can help me understand the why they think denouncing the progressive wing is to their advantage?

[Captain Hilts]

1. For the same reason liberal Dems attack moderate Dems. They think they can convert them! nt

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

3. But aren't Democrats, by nature of their party platform, liberal?

MKJ

[robinlynne]

7. supposedly. But things are changing in the party. There is a group of dems in power

who vote consistently with the GOP. they have followers here on DU. They call themselves centrists.

[OzarkDem]

4. Moderate Dems?

I've never seen that here.

[Naturyl]

2. Don't be one-sided...

It's not as if us Kucinich/Edwards/Biden types don't do plenty of Hillary and Obama bashing of our own.

[ConsAreLiars]

6. I explicitlly excluded the usual candidate threads. I was commenting on

something different that I have observed. I guess I wasn't clear.

[robinlynne]

8. This is not about candidates. It is about principles.

[jeff30997]

5. Simple...

They wanna win.At all cost.Sad.

[ConsAreLiars]

9. But do they want to win as a faction or as a party?

I think they have to answer that. Why the attempt to drive out half the party?

[sufrommich]

32. Where are your examples of moderates

"attempting to drive out" anyone? I have a feeling it's more likely you don't want to them to have a presence here on DU.It's a forum board filled with Dems of all stripes. If you don't feel up to debating people who disagree with you,don't.

[Speck Tater]

10. All Dems attack all other Dems. It's the law.

Case in point: This thread attacking moderate Dems.

[Bolo Boffin]

12. What was that Will Rogers said?

"I don't belong to any organized party; I'm a Democrat."

Maybe we could turn that into our advantage to attract the disillusioned voter:

"Vote Democratic! If We Win It All, We'll Never Do Anything With It!"

[Rosemary2205]

29. Yep. It's like herding cats.

:)

[Bolo Boffin]

11. Excuse me, WHAT?

I just wish the left wing of the party would wise up and organize. Bitching about Corporats isn't any way to actually win votes.

[cali]

13. LOL!

Nothing like a post surreptitiously attacking moderate and centrist dems under the guise of asking a question. You appear to have a cognitive dissonance problem- and this is nothing but flamebait. Strikes me that the purists are attacking those they don't agree with tonight in a dishonest and sanctimonious way.

[ConsAreLiars]

16. Can you answer the question instead of just trashing me?

I would guess that you could, if you had the insight, but then would choose not to.

[Name removed]

18. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[aikoaiko]

14. I see a lot more anti Hillary and Obama threads then anything else.

[ConsAreLiars]

15. Again, as I said, it is not about candidate threads. (n/t)

[Basileus Basileon]

17. The irony here is staggering.

"You know who's the real enemy here, folks? MODERATES! THEY WANT TO DESTROY OUR PARTY! THEY THINK WE ARE EVIL! FEAR AND HATE THEM! They're trying to sow discord between us! Fuck moderates!"

[ConsAreLiars]

19. Is my observation on the frequency of attacks by so-called "moderates"

in error? How do you see the ratio? This is my impression, it certainly is subjective, and maybe you see things differently. Why do you think self-described "centrists" want to drive out the "lefties," or do you not see that happening. Oh, and since you can't read, where did I advocate fratricidal bashing?

[Basileus Basileon]

22. I see the ratio as being completely skewed.

One can hardly go two threads without seeing "centrist" or "moderate" used as a term of denigration; you yourself refer to them as "so-called" and "self-described," and seem to like to put the words "centrist" and "moderate" in scare quotes. The DLC is a boogeyman even more feared than Karl Rove. Supporters of Hillary Clinton are frequently called "Hillbots" and she's frequently likened to a Republican. I've been frequently bashed as a "centrist," a "troll," and a "Republican," and I haven't breathed a word of support for one Republican policy.

Frankly, I haven't ever seen centrists declaring a desire to "drive out the lefties." The only time I ever see anything like that is when ideologues post bullshit like this post.

Your entire OP is a haughty, sanctimonious, barely-disguised slur against moderates and centrists. While Fox News gets away with sticking a question mark at the end of an attack, you should know that people here have wised to that trick.

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

25. When did moderates and centrists become a political party?

You all need to get yourself some grass roots and decide on your platform.

Democrats are liberals.

Those who aren't liberal are conservatives.

Those in the middle are needing another direction, perhaps. MKJ

[Basileus Basileon]

26. Life isn't so black-and-white.

Joe Biden is a moderate Democrat. He is not as liberal as Dennis Kucinich. He is not as conservative as Webb, who is a conservative Democrat. Webb is nowhere near as conservative as Arlen Specter, who is a moderate Republican. Specter is more conservative than Arnold Schwarzenegger, who is a something of a liberal Republican. And all mentioned are more liberal than Sam Brownback or Rick Santorum, who are conservative Republicans.

The people who are castigated around here as "moderates" and "centrists" are people who are squarely in the Democratic party, and who generally are further to the left than most all elected Republicans. Obama is a centrist Democrat. Most DUers--even those called "centrist"--are far to the left of him.

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

30. Generally further to the left of most elected Republicans is definitely where most of the country is

However, I can't understand how someone can claim to "squarely" be a Democrat and trash liberals at the same time, when liberalism defines the party.

It's a having cake and eating it too attitude, saying no to pro choice, no to government funded assistance for the most vulnerable of our society, no to reducing military spending, etc, etc. and then attacking those in the party who support those things which are an integral part of the Democratic platform.

Followed by trumpeting their "moderate, centrist" values, again which I'm not sure what that means except equivocation.

Many of our Democratic Congressional representatives are not Democrats except in name, but that is something of which I'm sure you're aware. Slowly, but surely, they are revealing themselves as Democrats for political expedience only, not because their own principles are most aligned with its values. Maybe that's what a centrist really is, one whose principles are amorphous and ever changing for convenience and avoidance of being forced to make a principled stand.

MKJ

[Basileus Basileon]

35. I'm not seeing any "liberal trashing" around here.

I see individual liberals being trashed, but not for their views, but rather for their behavior. I see subgroups, like the netroots, being trashed, but not for their liberalism, but rather for their binary thinking and petulant behavior.

People pronouncing their 'moderate' values generally does not mean they stand for 'equivocation,' but rather that they understand that compromise is built into our political system, and that those who see compromise as treason are often standing against our best shots at effecting real change in the world.

Case in point: I remember back when the first war spending bill was created under Pelosi--you know, the one with the timeline for withdrawal. That was our best shot towards actually ending the war. Yet many self-identified progressives were firmly against it, because it was gradual withdrawal, not immediate. In the political fight that followed, the netroots were allied with the Republicans in defeating a withdrawal proposal. They were bashed for that. That does not mean they were bashed for their liberalism, but rather for their refusal to compromise.

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

36. You must have missed those who are anti-choice, anti-union, anti-government assistance for the poor,

anti-full civil rights for all, etc, etc posts from the "moderates" here on this message board.

FWIW, I was fully supportive of the bill and wanted to see it sent back after the veto, as many times as was necessary. Pointing to "self-identified progressives" as the ones responsible for its demise is an interesting take, although not unusual in some quarters. MKJ

[Basileus Basileon]

37. I must have missed them indeed.

Such viewpoints are not moderate, they are conservative, and DU is not the place for those people.

I wouldn't dare claim that the netroots were responsible for the bill's demise. They're statistically irrelevant and powerless, just like any internet faction; were they otherwise, Ron Paul would be the Republican nominee and DK the Democratic. Good for leading the debate and forming liberal thought, though. Certainly among the most influential of internet demographics. However, I do recall many of them shrieking against the bill. A majority? Hard to tell. Many, at least.

[cali]

31. you bet your litle ass it is.

you make a broad assertion without backing it up in the slightest. I think your observations are wrong. I don't see it happening on any significant scale.

Facts matter (well maybe not to some). Dennis Kucinich routinely wins candidate poll here, while Clinton garners about 10%. What do you think that says? Let me translate: There are far more self-identified progressives here than moderates.

[gulliver]

20. Why do Dem-categorizing Dems consistently categorize Dems?

I refuse to engage in trashing these Dem categorizers as some would. Some might say they use level 6 (of 10) rhetoric to rile up the susceptible. But why denounce those who would denounce denunciations -- of which I am one? They know who we are and we know who they are, so let's not kid themselves. We must not attack those who would be the victims of our attacks. We must not divide ourselves from the scum who insist on dividing us.

[Fresh_Start]

21. Not seeing any disproportionate attack by centrists

its the extremes that act extreme not the center.

Being a moderate, doesn't mean we don't have opinions or preferences. It means we are willing to consider other opinions. Sort of like, we believe we ought to be a community and welcome other opinions/voices.

I read something the other day about how the web has hindered political discourse. (No this is the ROVE BS, this was by some academic).
Basically, the web has essentially resulted in people singing only to the choir.

[TreasonousBastard]

23. And why do so many leftwing Dems...

attack moderates? I'll answer your question when you answer mine.

You see, the very tone of your "question" assumes that you, resumably one of the "progeressives," are right in all things and are under some sort of vicious attack by those nasty "moderates." Perhaps, just perhaps, the moderates are not really such bad guys after all, but see different methods to attain some of the same goals.

The trick is to find a way to work with them, not simply lie in ambush. They won't go away no matter how much you wish it.

For whatever it's worth, I've noticed far more "progressives" denouncing moderates than the other way around, but even if I added up the threads and posts as evicence it wouldn't make a bit of differenxce-- victims never like having their victimhood destroyed.

Also FWIW, I've been a progressive socialist for going on about 50 years, and I've never changed my beliefs, just my understanding of how much is possible. And my much lowered tolerance for asshole windbags of the left and the right.

Truth is, not that much is possible-- the best we can do is tiny steps.

[ConsAreLiars]

24. My reading may be (is?) different than yours.

I see exposing the corporatists (for their allegiance) as different that trying to purge the party. And I said I would not call the self-styled centrists who call on others to do the purging trolls or enemy agents. I agree that we have to work with them, for now. And I agree that there are more progressives denouncing the collaborationists on this board, at least. But I have (thought I've) seen more threads initiated by so-called centrists urging a purge than the reverse. The divide (and conquer) advocates were the source of my complaint.

[nadinbrzezinski]

27. This demonization of the left has been going on in the US

since Reagan in its modern form.

Many of the DLC are true believers and see progressives as the rabble and a threat to the new economic deals that have done great damage to the country.

I could write a book on this... hell, perhaps one day I will... but this started with the first attacks on the unions and the new deal

So yes, any progressive is not perceived as a threat, but is a threat to the new status quo

[H2O Man]

34. I agree.

I think that progressives have always recognized that the democratic party is big enough to seat everyone at the table. We are pleased to pass and share our ideas with everyone: the conservatives, the moderates, the liberals, and we invite our friends the leftists to join us.

But especially since the Reagan era, a few of those who sit towards the moderate and conservative end of the table have attempted to play a role that they are not entitled to -- saying who can speak and when, and saying the the conversation at the left end of the table is "dangerous." In the past few years, we've seen more of the conservatives and moderates moving towards our side of the table, trying to pass themselves off as "liberals" and some even saying, "By golly gosh, I'm quite progressive on some issues."

They come to the left side of the table to try to indoctrinate people to the "centrist" positions that are not at the center of the democratic party, but rather are central to the corporate state. They try to deny the liberals and progressives the opportunity to speak, but they darned sure want us to invest our time, energy, money and votes to further their agenda.

[LeftCoast]

28. What is a 'moderate' or a 'centrist' or a 'leftie' for that matter?

Reading through this thread it appears that everyone is using their own individual definitions of these terms and arguing past each other.

[EstimatedProphet]

33. I know why

It's because you're being a hypocrite.