2 new Must Read Articles: About the new Progressive Consensus in this country!

[rabidchickens]

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070709/perlstein

its an article from a bit more then a month ago and it was already posted here.

Also here is something passed on to me by a friend, believe it or not its written by the director of the Communist Party USA, the CPUSA has taken a big turn lately and are now endorsing Democrats and in route to becoming a sort of Socialist Party USA style- advocacy group within the Democratic Party

http://www.cpusa.org/article/articleview/834/1/145/

I was a bit scared before I read that, but the article was intelligent and quite reasonable (i suppose I still buy into what I was taught about the c-world in school :P)

[IndyOp]

1. Ooooooooh, I like this:

Neither leaders nor its foot soldiers anticipate that the struggle going forward will be easy, but nearly everyone is convinced that a corner has been turned and that only complacency, disunity and narrow tactics will block the coalition’s forward motion.

:woohoo:

After the 2006 victories, labor (to which I belong, even though I don't have a union to join) saw the impact of their efforts -- just getting Dems and progressives in office was a huge boost to morale.

[IndyOp]

2. Thought-provoking... More from the article at the link in the OP:

Our understanding of “the movement” is not identical with how some others understand the term. In our view, the movement is comprised of the core forces mentioned above along with other social forces, networks, and movements.... share a similar political culture and outlook.

While it welcomes labor, it doesn’t see the working class and its organized sector as a leading and indispensable force. <snip>

....neither they nor their constituency can substitute for the power base that the core forces and their organizational forms bring to class and democratic struggles, not to mention do without the analytical insights, decades of experience, mass organizations and resources, appreciation of the importance of unity, and tactical know-how of these forces.

In the months ahead, this broad based movement has to avoid three dangers that I alluded to earlier. One is strategic fuzziness and tactical narrowness that takes the form of skipping stages, counter posing advanced against partial demands, and turning Congressional Democrats into the main enemy.

A second danger is complacency and passivity that takes the form of simply relying on the Democratic Party to express the anger of millions and to enact legislation. Unless tens of millions of people see and feel the organizational and political weight of an organized movement that is championing their interests in day-to-day struggles, the mobilization in the 2008 elections will not reach its full potential.

:applause:

And the final danger is disunity that comes in many forms. One that I don’t think we anticipated is the fissures and even ruptures within the people’s movement that have cropped up in the course of legislative struggles. The legislative battles over peace and immigration come to mind. How to maintain unity when differences on legislation or any other matter arise – and they inevitably will – is a critical question.

=================

Fissures and ruptures also in the course of verified voting legislation movement... :(

[IndyOp]

3. One more snippet & kick...

Not everybody in the peace movement, however, is on the same page it appears. Some forget, or dismiss out of hand, that Democrats overwhelmingly and a few Republicans passed a supplemental spending bill this spring that included a timetable for withdrawal or that the surge is solely the handiwork of Bush or that the views of the majority of people correspond with the outlook of the majority of Congressional Democrats.

Instead, we are told that the only thing that stands in the way of a quick exit from Iraq is the Democratic Party and the treacherous role of its leadership. All Pelosi and Reid have to do is wave a magic wand and in a flash the necessary votes in the Senate and House will appear to end the war.

Since the Democratic leadership won’t, the peace movement, so the argument goes, has no option, but to divide the Democrats – progressives against centrists. But before anyone does this, the following questions should be asked: who will benefit from this suggested division of the Democrats in the House and Senate? Who will gain advantage from shifting responsibility for war from Bush to Pelosi? Which party’s electoral prospects will be improved going into 2008 if the peace movement works to split the Democratic Party? <snip>

In response to a group of communists whose manifesto militantly proclaimed that they wanted to attain their goal without stopping at intermediate stages and without any compromises, Frederick Engels wrote, “What childish innocence it is to present impatience as a theoretically convincing argument.” <snip>

Those of us on the left have to combine patience with passion, outrage with steadiness, realism with radicalism.

=============

But what about Kucinich's contention that we don't need to "have the votes" -- that Congress just needs to refuse to offer ANY funding bill. Congressmembers who won't vote for withdrawal -- can just NOT vote for any funding bill drafted by the Rethugs and if no bill is put forward by the Dems, then there is no more funding.

:shrug:

[rabidchickens]

4. btw i actually dont think those were posted before

I thought they were reposted, I dont actually think so. Glad you got something from them. I forget how broad the pro-labor movement is and the pro-Democrat movement is.

We need to continue to be the nation's voice against neoliberalism

[KoKo]

5. Both articles...interesting read. Although that second one

causes me a little pause because of the "C" word, too........

[rabidchickens]

6. Well they want to go 10 steps to the left

I want to go 3, lets walk together for a while :P

[struggle4progress]

7. Why would anybody care what CPUSA says? It's a tiny group. And

at least at one point in the early 1960s it may have actually have been controlled by the FBI, since a big chunk of its membership was on the FBI payroll.

[rabidchickens]

8. Because it was an intelligent article that laid out a lot of good points about the war

CPU has around 16,000 members, which is small they were huge in the 30s-40s and now I basically agree with their whole short term agenda, as far as labor rights are concerned and health care etc