WHO STOLE THE SOUL: Defining the battle for the "soul of the party" for FL Dems
WHO STOLE THE SOUL: Defining the battle for the "soul of the party"by Brook Hines | nashville_brook
https://thefloridasqueeze.wordpress.com/2015/07/17/who-stole-the-soul-defining-the-battle-for-the-soul-of-the-party/?preview=true&preview_id=12688&preview_nonce=3f5ed76232
Its been said of Floridas highest-profile 2016 Democratic primary races, that theyre battles for the soul of the party. Its strange nomenclature, even if on the the face it seems clear cut. Its not obvious what the partys soul actually is, what it looks like, or how wed know if was won or lost. Regardless of how vague and ambiguous it is, The Battle For The Soul of the Party (BFSP) is compelling. You dont want to miss a moment of this action, which will continue on for the next eight months, and beyond.
There are certain assumptions that cant be avoided in this scenario. Even though its not made explicit, its implied that theres one candidate who represents The People (the soul) and one candidate who doesnt. So the BFSP is an epic battle of the little guy trying to win against all odds against the forces of evil. Its classic comic book stuff.
Political campaigns speak the language of symbols, and the most basic of symbolic gestures is the binary opposition: good or bad, left or right. According to the BFSP metaphor weve added a new one: The People or The Party. Everyone wants you to think they represent The People and not the Powers That Be. Thankfully there are voting records and public statements to help us decipher who is on the side of The People and who isnt.
Writing in The Nation, Eric Alterman observes that the clearest version of BFSP is illustrated in the war between Governor Andrew Cuomo and New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio:
Alterman is saying that giving lip service to economic justice while delivering only identity politics is the highest form of cynicism.
Progressives pay a big price for steadfastly insisting that The People be treated fairly. Party leaders distance themselves from these champions. They forego easy money from big donors, and they're taunted in the media as chasing unicorns. Alterman points out that Centrists, or more accurately, Corporatists, are willing to cut deals that will extinguish the New Deal. Some do it more quietly than others, but all will claim that theyre the grown-ups in the room for selling out the interests of the The People.
If cynicism and hypocrisy is the only route to office, then whats the point of electing these guys? Its the Lie Agreed Upon, that no one will rock the boat when those who sell themselves as Progressive actually vote as Corporatists. The extremes of economic inequality that are plaguing our state are quickly making identity politics and social liberalism luxuries of a bygone era.
What people need right now are fair wages so they can have a roof over their head and maybe see a doctor. Our unemployment rate is low. Workers are more productive than any time in history, and yet families still cant make ends meet, take a sick day or have the assurance that a medical emergency wont result in bankruptcy.
Alterman continues: On the other side is New York Mayor Bill de Blasio, also a social liberal, who has focused on tackling the citys inequality crisis...he has passed paid-sick-leave legislation and a limited living-wage executive order; and is fighting for a $15 minimum wage in the city, among many other initiatives. But most of his plans have been frustrated by resistance in Albany. This is the case even when such measures would cost the state nothing.
Progressives know that the battle for the soul of the party isnt about a left/right binary measured solely on identity politics. Its about a rich/poor binary or, rich/middle class, if were using approved messaging. Thats why progressives put an emphasis on examining the actual candidates to determine if their actions are consistent with prioritizing the economic interests of everyone, and not just the super-wealthy.
Progressive values are so ascendant in the culture now that even Centrist party candidates trade on the idea that a win for the soul implies a win for Progressives. Otherwise they wouldnt send out fundraising emails claiming to offer bold, progressive solutions, and that theyll win with grassroots support from thousands of supporters...not just big donations from lobbyists and millionaires. Which is to say, this candidates base actually comprises lobbyists and millionaires, but wont you kick in a few bucks so we can also claim to have grassroots support?
If being a Progressive is so beneficial for garnering votes and small-dollar donors, why dont these politicians vote that once theyre way in office? If those votes given to Republican causes were so honorable, why not fundraise on them? Why not own your centrism? Elected officials either voted for corporate interests, school privatization and mandatory ultrasounds, or they didnt. If these were such good votes, whats the problem in selling yourself based on them?
Why not tell the truth?
The progressive base in Florida is stronger than it has ever been. I dont know why that is. Maybe its because peoples lives have reached a point where theyre looking for real solutions and people with backbone to fight for them. Maybe its because Progressives have gotten better at getting our message out. Maybe Floridians are just sick of losing all the time with Republican Lite candidates who promise and cant deliver.
Whatever it is, no one is breaking out their old DLC t-shirts to head down to the campaign rally. Instead theyre wrapping themselves in rainbows and green signage, while downplaying all the votes that shifted economic burdens from corporations to working and middle class families. Or, required mandatory ultrasounds, or [link:money from public schools to line the pockets of private corporations|took money from public schools to line the pockets of private corporations].
If this election is for the soul of the party, we should at least define whats meant by that. If cynicism is the only route to office, and the grown-ups in the room demand only lip service for issues that are matters of life and death to working families, then whats the point?
This battle for the soul of party isnt about symbols were sick to death of symbols. Its about whether or not anyone in the party actually has a soul.
DirkGently
(12,151 posts)Republicans have enough dog-whistle terms. We don't need any of our own. Let's stop pretending ordinary progressives are off in the weeds with Stalin somewhere, and Republican-voting Dems are in the "center."
The center of Wall Street, maybe.
nashville_brook
(20,958 posts)let's not start from the standpoint of what we think other will let us have. let's instead start from the standpoint of what we NEED as citizens and working families.
we'll never achieve success through "revolutions of lowered expectations."
DirkGently
(12,151 posts)Yet Dems and progressives are often convinced to settle for trying to hold on to the bare minimum. Fight for more. Make them defend.
MrScorpio
(73,631 posts)nashville_brook
(20,958 posts)MrScorpio
(73,631 posts)I've been one since the 1970s. He's been gone for 21 years.
https://twitter.com/Mr_Scorpio/status/622422662116212736
nashville_brook
(20,958 posts)there was something really special about him, and about the themes he worked with. he had a prescience, and the courage to explore ideas that no one else was working on. he also took deep dives into his subject matter, which i think is one of his lasting gifts to the genre.
MrScorpio
(73,631 posts)I started buying them in the 70's when I was in high school. The only reason that I never met him was the fact that I never went to California since he moved out there until he passed away in '94.
Dick Ayers once came to Detroit and I met him once. I guys that's the next best thing. By the way, I share a birthday with Bernie Wrightson, of whom I've bumped into now and then again.
I stopped collecting about ten years ago, but I still have my books.