Populism, Grangers and some US History : Lessons

[nadinbrzezinski]

from the past

First off for the DLC hecklers, I am not leaving the party, just not voting for some of your chosen... sorry, cannot stomach them any more

Now step with me to the time traveling machine and lets go back to a wonderful time when horses ruled the country side, and iron horses were laid out across the country. This is the time when the small time farm owner felt he was at risk from the robber barons who at times just took the land to lay the trains on. Oh they did it very legally and their papers came straight from the Governor of either the territory, or the elected one. ONe thing they had in common, they were bought and paid for by the Railroad Barons and did their bidding. Blazing Saddles, though comedic, does not present a wrong picture of a governor, for that governor was owned by the Railroads... unlike the movies, people lost, on a regular basis. The Grangers came from this need to fight the robber barons. They were never successful, partially or othewise... if my gut is correct on this, the Greens may very well be the modern day Grangers... no insult to the Greens, and please run somebody good against Feinstein.

Then there were three farmers who got together one fine day for tea, as the legend has it, They knew that they had no voice with either of the two major parties. They got together with some of their other friends, and got a party a- going, These boys were the Populists and the movement spread like wild fire, no pun intended. Within four years they had seats in Congress... and within eight years they were very much nipping at the heels of the Democrats... and there was talk of a national bid for the Presidency. The powers that be were not too happy... and in what may be the first true example of triangulation, the Democrats co opted the agenda. By 1900 the Populists were for the most part gone (re registered as Dems and running under that banner) You may know the best part of their legacy, aka the New Deal.

Now every time anybody raises this issue the DLCeers scream, go ahead leave the party

Go ahead the base is secure.

Ok, lets take the attitude for what it is. The DLC is doing all it can to hold off the Populists. Paul Hackett has them quaking in their boots, why? He IS a populist and he came very close to wining. He is not the faux populist that the GOP runs all the time... he is the real deal.

Secondly, the base is not secure. I will contend that many people are waiting for a new movement, whether it is inside the party, or out is immaterial, that they can follow. When we have, lets use examples, a US Senator saying the Progressives are not listened to, there is a problem... but it indicates that we are having the same problems the Dems had between 1876-1900, they have been co opted by money and breaking away from money is hard... very hard.... they no longer care about ideas (not my observation, but in the Atlantic magazine) but how to get money.

So what needs to happen, and the ground is very ripe for it, is either an organized take over of the Democratic Party (given California's reaction to the take over it may be easier said than done), or outright a new populist movement.

The lessons of history are clear, successful third parties, are not necessarily those who take over (like the GOP, the most successful of all), but those who force change in the system and a renewal of democracy.

Oh and it will happen, one way or the other, for the DLC is in bed with the robber barons of our times... and that is obvious to any but the least observant.

[Fovea]

1. So how do we get as many populists/progressives as possible

running in 06 and 08?

I think that politely asking the DLC to join the GOP would be a great start, but that's just me.

[nadinbrzezinski]

2. Oh I agree with you

they should just re-register....

The theory is that you start at the local ADs, where you will nominate candidates that will be elected up the chain, depending on the level of office you seemk, so a lcoal city council, where elections have an R or a D, are theoretically elected at the local AD, where they are suported, the same goes for state office holders... now at the national level, the state party needs to nominate them... and for the presidency, all fifty state parties need to get together and elect a candidate. The primaries theoretically give us a voice.

Now here in California, after the 2004 coup, many of us actually went to our local ADs and got involved, and drove the DLCers out. They have come back by working from the top down in the party.. basically squashing this revolt... and making many of us go... WTF, time to get a true revolt going. And I mean that revolt in the good sense of the word, and people need to fight back... why if enough people should elect a Green, for the US Senate, that will be quite the shot across that bow (and chances are DiFi will still win anyway)

The best I can tell you is work within the party if you can still believe it can work. Meetings are usually not well attended so taking over the agenda is fairly easy... me... I don't know, I fear we may need something radical to happen for these guys to wake up. Oh and the ground is very ripe for that.

hell I will contend that today's Democrats would not allow FDR to run for the presidency, but his cousin TR, he is the perfect candidate and I must say... he was a good President and a good Republican... I wish most of the Rs were like TR... but that is the model of a candidate tht the party is now looking for, not an FDR, why they are doing all they can to diminish the influence of the Progressives... they are cornered my friend, they are cornered.

[PassingFair]

3. Three letters:

DFA

Oh, and by the way, Nadin, thankyou for your advocacy of the progressive wing of OUR party, and for withstanding the obnoxious jibes of those three hecklers.

The funny thing is, I had posted this article about populism:


http://college.hmco.com/history/readerscomp/rcah/html/a...

in an earlier thread today, before I saw yours!

[nadinbrzezinski]

4. Which I truly hope it is the

equivalent of the Populists.. so running anybody in the primaries against DLC Feinstein?

[PassingFair]

5. Oops, link not working...

try this:

http://college.hmco.com/history/readerscomp/rcah/html/ah_070500_populism.htm

[PassingFair]

8. I'm not in California, nadin

but we are vetting our candidates now.

[nadinbrzezinski]

9. Cool I sure hope we get an alternative here

I truly do.

[nadinbrzezinski]

6. Oh you welcome

I am familar with the History and this is one of those moments when this is going to happen.

Personally nothing better could happen in '06 than Dianna given her walking papers by a Green... that would wake the Party up in a hurry. I personally wish that we could just tell the DLC to go away, and just retake the party... but I fear they need several true populists, inside and out of the party, to be elected...

[MrBenchley]

7. "Paul Hackett has them quaking in their boots, why?" Tee hee hee

That IS rich...

I suspect you're talking about THIS Paul Hackett...

"Hackett was flying back Monday evening from Washington after meeting with Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada and the Democratic Senate Campaign Committee, Woodruff said.
Reid's spokeswoman, Tessa Hefen, would not confirm or deny the meeting Monday, but Woodruff later said Reid gave Hackett the confidence to run."

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/politics/12809588.htm

Sounds like Harry "quaked" up a storm, all right. Here's some more "quaking" from Chuck Schumer....

"Sen. Charles Schumer (N.Y.), chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC), has called Hackett more than once in the past few weeks to sound him out about a run in 2006."

http://www.thehill.com/thehill/export/TheHill/News/Campaign/090706.html