HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » LWolf » Journal
Page: 1


Profile Information

Member since: 2003 before July 6th
Number of posts: 46,179

Journal Archives


That makes more sense.

I don't think I was off the mark, though. You see, the current round of neoliberalism was ushered into the Democratic Party by Clinton and the DLC. It used to be fashionable here to criticize the DLC, but NOT the Clintons. In '08, DU stopped being "underground," and stopped describing itself as "left-wing," (used to be in the "about DU" text), and the newer members flooding in were more "centrist," and proud of it. I put that in quotes because it's a code word for neoliberalism. I don't know that many even knew that; they bought into the "pragmatic" characterization and other propaganda that surrounded it. The left, here, was thrown under the bus. And just like the DLC, which, yes, I know is defunct, replaced by the "New Democrats" and the "Third Way," which are both simply a continuation...anyway, just like the DLC appropriated terms like "liberal" and "progressive," the term "left" on DU began to evolve into something else.

There was a time, while we were being thrown under the bus by "centrist" DUers, that we were actually referred to as the "loony left." Just Like right wingers did. Then the "centrists" slowly began to adopt it for themselves, even if it wasn't really accurate. You see, that divorce between economic justice and social justice was in play.

What I, and a whole nation of what passes for the actual left in the United States (which isn't really all that "left," globally speaking,) have seen out in the world is that the neo-liberal establishment, who turned their backs on the wave of energy for change, and thus, in some of our views, lost the White House by nominating a "centrist," is now working avidly to retain what power they have left, and part of that involves attacking the term "neoliberal," and especially denying it. Out there, and right here.

I know that the majority of DU these days energetically disagrees with that assessment, and that this post right here is going to be subject to many vicious attacks. That doesn't negate my, and others', view or make it any less real. From the left, in my view, there's very little resembling "left" on DU in 2017. That's why I don't spend that much time here anymore. It's increasingly irrelevant.

Again, in my view, I think our party ought to be moving left. That's not an attack. It's not against DU's TOS to say that I want the party to abandon neoliberalism and move left. And that's really what this is about. The party is divided, fractured, and the party of the future depends on which side of that divide either evolves toward the other or away from the party.

Meanwhile, I'm spending the majority of my political time and energy out with people in the real world, with activists around my state, instead of at the keyboard.

I'm sorry if people who aren't really neoliberal centrists have been called neoliberal. That doesn't detract from the reality that the party establishment IS a neoliberal establishment. It could be that those who don't like having that label flung at them might want to work harder at cleansing the party of neoliberalism from the inside out instead of building a defensive wall around it to keep potential allies on the other side.

I've got work to do, and places to go. I'll be back eventually, and if anyone has anything thoughtful, rather than hateful, to say, I'll respond.

I am a leftist who is, in the big picture,

"Anti-nationalism" of any kind.

That said, I agree with most of what you've said. Perhaps I differ in that I see "Western expansionism" to be dangerous for the globe. I don't see that expansionism as an expansion of "democracy," and yes, I put it in quotes because I think it deserves them. We've used the term as a tool to get what we wanted, and democracy is not what the American Empire has wanted.

Even in Jefferson's time, with his linking of empire and "democracy," empire, expansionism, has all been about capitalism and power. It's about using the carrot of "democracy" to beat people into submission to our corrupt power. Then and now, it's nothing to be proud of, at least for me.

Russia? My Russian History professor, himself a Russian immigrant, taught me about that cultural legacy among other things. I don't stand in judgement. I hope those strong, resilient, and industrious people do the same as I hope we are doing: hold their government accountable for democratic principles.

And until we clean up our own corrupted mess, we're not in any place to judge others. In my opinion. I'd rather look in my own nation's mirror, judge, and hold it accountable.

To be honest,

this thread feels like fighting the primaries all over again. I agree with much of what you said, but this:

Some who identified with us said stupid things in the past and they deserve denunciation. And we have denounced and renounced them.

And "some" (read "way to fucking many" of those on the neoliberal side of the divide did the same, AND ARE STILL DOING SO. We have nothing to apologize for.

We admit we made mistakes in talking about this in the primaries and we know we need to correct all of those mistakes and avoid repeating them if we are to play any meaningful role in the future.

I admit nothing of the kind, because I don't think that's true.

For the rest, I'm in agreement. I'm moving forward to resist oppression and work for progressive, inclusive, positive change for the 99%. And that, my friend, is not about the Democratic Party, nor the factions within the Party. It's about the people. If we're going to be inclusive, we can't wall ourselves within the party. That's exclusive, and it's limiting. The Democratic Party, and all or some of it's factions, are invited to be part of the process; welcomed, even. But the issues, and the way forward? It's not a partisan thing. It's bigger than that.
Go to Page: 1