2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumRebels On Left And Right Are Sick Of Compromise
ED KILGORE MARCH 18, 2014, 1:29 PM EDT
As progressives look with trepidation toward the midterm elections, there is naturally a renewed upsurge of complaints that the Obama administration like the Clinton administration has represented at best a series of pyrrhic victories for the left, and at worst a betrayal of the progressive cause. Theres been a tendency among left-leaning thinkers and writers to lump these arguments together and dismiss them as unrealistic or counterproductive. But in fairness, it is worth sorting them out, and also comparing them to similar grousing about the GOP on the right.
The most publicized recent leftist cri de couer was penned by Adolph Reed at Harpers (subscription only!), with the provocative title: Nothing Left: The Long, Slow Surrender of American Liberals. Reeds basic argument is that the age-old policy objectives of the historic left have been sacrificed on the altar of Democratic electoral prospects, leading to a neoliberal conservative consensus hidden by the regular exaggeration of Republican menace and Democratic accomplishments. Reeds not a dimes worth of difference judgments (reminiscent of the 2000 Nader campaign) on the two parties particularly during the Obama administration have been roundly criticized in liberal circles from the moment they appeared (notably by Michelle Goldberg at The Nation and Harold Meyerson at The American Prospect).
But his broader arguments that (1) progressives must view their political engagements from the perspective of actual policy achievements, not just electoral victories, and (2) that progressivism as a social movement must remain independent of and occasionally in conflict with Democratic politics was not really challenged. Meyersons judgement that Reed shows it is possible to get the big picture right when you can see the small pictures at all appears broadly shared on the Democratic left.
A different argument has been made actually for years by Reeds comrade-in-arms Thomas Frank, author of the famous 2004 book on the success of Republicans in co-opting working-class rage against elites, Whats the Matter With Kansas? While Frank shares Reeds fury towards liberal surrender to conservatives on the policy issues that most matter to him (and also shares Reeds thinly-veiled contempt for the culture-war skirmishes that distract liberals from the economic fights they need to be waging), he places considerable stock in the potential for a left-bent Democratic populist message to change the electoral equation and win back the white working class voters who have defected in recent years if only Democratic centrists with their smug demography-is-destiny route to political supremacy can be overthrown.
more
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/cafe/the-price-of-compromise-dissenters-left-and-right
djean111
(14,255 posts)Yes. Political supremacy seems to be the only goal these days.
Do I think the Centrists will be progressive if they gained supremacy?
No, not for one fucking second.
polichick
(37,152 posts)Arneoker
(375 posts)There really is only one serious threat to Democratic Centrists right now, very rightwing Republicans. Progressives can only help overthrow the Centrists by helping the right wingers overthrow them.
What progressives need to do is complain about the Centrists less (not that they should stop altogether, as the Centrists are quite flawed!) and build up their clout more. To the point where they are a serious threat in their own right. At that point the Centrists will just naturally be listening to the Progressives a lot more.
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)MrScorpio
(73,631 posts)Which is why it's too hard to even do the things that both sides agree that must be done.
djean111
(14,255 posts)paying themselves and ladling money to corporations. Paying the military.
Seriously, really, what do both sides agree on? Lately it is how big or how little to cut social programs.
Almost all of them, IMO, could be on a special all-political version of Dancing With the Stars - they do a delicate little dance between not pissing off voters and not pissing off the people who give them large sums of money. Once they figure out how to not need voters.....yikes! And it seems as if the Third Way is busily running Democratic voters down that cattle chute to GOP-barely-disguised-Right. We are constantly being exhorted to vote for centrists - and then what will we have - a GOP-heavy and GOP-light congress.
What things do they need to cooperate on that they WANT to cooperate on?
I am starting to think one term only for everybody would maybe be good - no time to entrench, harder for big money to keep paying new people, just run down the to-do list and get it done. Like Dave in that movie Dave.