Now they are calling us old style left wing "populists" who hate free trade.

[madfloridian]

Harold Ford, Al From, and Will Marshall, that is. They also claim left-wing populists say trade is shipping our jobs overseas. Well, something is taking our jobs overseas. :shrug:

Actually, they are right. I do feel that way. I feel uneasy since I realized this group had such a huge impact on the new trade deal presented by Pelosi last week.

The trade deal and New Democrats

If not free trade, then what is causing the jobs to go overseas? We are being asked to be in denial.

This column by Harold Ford and Al From is a brief look at the topics to be covered at the DLC's National Conversation in Nashville in July. It appears the new DLC nemesis is "populism", the thing to avoid according to that group.

The new theme is that we who are problems for free trade are "populists."

Right-wing populists claim immigrants are stealing Americans' jobs. Left-wing populists say trade is shipping our jobs overseas. Both look backwards toward an allegedly better past and argue that, by sealing our borders and retreating from global markets, government can recover it.

The past WAS better, and most of us felt much more secure than we do now. So I differ with them. However, they are setting the policy. (See the article posted in the link above called Reviving Trade Policy).

From Al From and Harold Ford about what to expect at the July convention.

National Conversation

The first two paragraphs tell you all you need to know...that this is about sending the signal to us who feel like things are spiraling out of control. They also sent a signal when they praised the new trade deal before many of our Democrats knew what was in it.

After six years of stagnant incomes, increasing inequality, rising debt and declining confidence, many Americans are rightly anxious about their economic futures.

But the last thing they need is an old populism that plays to their fear, anger and pessimism, and, in the end, will only make matters worse. Yet, there are unmistakable signs of a growing "populist" revolt against globalization, especially immigration and trade.

And they nearly repeat this in the last paragraph. Their hatred of the "old populism" is making me feel uneasy. And I don't like the mention of "rewriting the social contract."

The key, though, is not just enacting a new array of government programs. It is rewriting the social contract to address the anxieties of hardworking Americans. And, it is rejecting calls from both sides of the political aisle for an old populism that plays to Americans' fears and adopting, instead, a new optimism that speaks to their aspirations, hopes and innate belief that the future can be better than the past. After all, that is the American experience.

And there was another sign last week that the DLC is going anti-populist now. They were anti anti-war fringe in 2003. Guess this does not surprise me.

Will Marshall's article about free trade.

Populist, Social Democrat or Progressive? The Democrats' Choice on Trade

He says Buchanan and Tancredo are on the right and come together with Sherrod Brown and Bernie Sanders (whom he calls vehemently anti-trade (which is not true)....and they form into Lou Dobbs. :think:

Today's neo-populism has right and left strands. Republican populism is mainly anti-immigration: Think Patrick Buchanan or Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Ariz). Democratic populism, personified by two newly elected Senators, Sherrod Brown of Ohio and Bernie Sanders of Vermont, is vehemently anti-trade. The two strands converge in the person of CNN blowhard Lou Dobbs, who blames immigrants and corporations for either taking American jobs or sending them overseas.

..."The old populism, after all, was a curious amalgam of cultural reaction and worker-farmer radicalism, mixing calls for important democratic reforms--public regulation of corporations, the progressive income tax, labor union rights, direct election of U.S. Senators--with nutty obsessions like "bimetallism," and nastier tinges of nativism, racism and religious bigotry.

Definition of populism.

populism

(philosophy) A political doctrine or philosophy that proposes that the rights and powers of ordinary people are exploited by a privileged elite, and supports their struggle to overcome this.

Well, then, I could easily be considered a populist. In 2003 the terms were lefty, fringe, anti-war used by the same group. Now they are warning us against being "populists".

Lefty fringe activists

[GreenPartyVoter]

1. Wanna guess how I feel about that?

*annoyed*

[Az]

2. Freetrade would have made sense a long time ago

When the players in the world were more closely matched. But instead we played 60 years of greed and hording of resources until there was a massive disparity in the world. Now freetrade is just the means of letting the genie we attempted to lash our society to free and into the world. Corporations unrestrained have no concern or care about society other than what money and resources can be dredged from it.

[magellan]

3. Well I DO hate free trade

Fair trade, on the other hand, is a keeper. As long as the anti-worker RWers don't get their mitts on it.

[southerncrone]

4. WE must refuse to let the word "populist" become a bad word like they've done w/liberal

Countering their attempts to make us look evil should be job 1. No wait, I take that back. Impeachment should be job 1. Make the other, job 1.5.

[madfloridian]

6. Amen...they have taken "liberal" and "progressive" and twisted them.

into something that has little meaning.

[loudsue]

10. Until Dems realize that these assholes are republican INFILTRATORS

into the Dem party, we, THE PEOPLE, will NEVER be able to take control of our country again, and by that very thing, DEMOCRACY does not exist.

Have I said how much I HATE THE DLC republicans???? Pretty much the same as I hate the RNC republicans.

This needs to be posted during "peak" hours on DU. The "convention" that the DLC has needs to be protested by EVERY good Democrat. We need to be out in the streets when they meet, or better yet, in the same room with these fucking traitors.

:kick::kick::kick:

[Jax]

21. loudsue gets it

along with madfloridian.

Infiltrators indeed. :thumbsup:

Great post here and thanks to mad for the OP.

Alyce

[Individualist]

34. Hear, hear!

Damn the DLC and their supporters. They want to turn the democratic party into a submissive branch of the republican party. They ARE traitors!

[RB TexLa]

5. Much of it depends on if you have a global or insular view and bias

When you hear someone referring to jobs with a country's name as ownership over them, it's a pretty good indication.

[LWolf]

40. I disagree,

at least with your labeling of world views, if I'm interpreting them correctly.

A global world view does not support "free" trade. It supports 100% fair trade. Across the planet, across political and economic boundaries.

An "insular" world view is not the reason people want fair trade.

[illinoisprogressive]

7. the DLC needs to go out of business and no DLC candidates elected.

that has to be the standard. No DLC

[southerncrone]

8. Agreed.

The DLC is the reason Dems seem to be a "fragmented" party. They are the bullies in our party. I consider them no better than the Repuke Neocons. I hope we & the Real Republicans can take back our parties & have decent & honest debates & the dignity to work together to make good things happen for the United States again.

I know it is a big wish, but anything less is not going to get us out of this downward spiral.

[provis99]

9. these DLC clowns really are the "neocons" of the Democratic Party

why, or why can't they just go away? Or at least call them by a more accurate name: Country-Club Republican wannabes.

[ConsAreLiars]

11. Well, by defining themselves as the "anti-populist" segment of the party

they sure identify their true loyalties. Corporatist operatives have no interest in seeing any form of government that is truly "of, by, and for the people." Good post, and an important one.

(edit grammar)

[Raksha]

12. Embrace the label--don't run from it! Hell YES, we're populists...

I'm a progressive populist and proud of it! It's a good sign that the DLC is starting to get worried by a populist backlash against so-called "free trade." But the only argument they seem to have against it is "Oh, that isolationist anti free-trade populism is so old hat," which is really no argument at all. It's just a matter of style, not substance, with more than a little bit of snobbery thrown in. Their "free trade" policies are killing American manufacturing, killing the middle class and we know it. And now the DLC knows that we know it, and that's GOOD! We're for FAIR trade, not free trade, and we should shout it from the rooftops!

[The2ndWheel]

13. It's been going on for thousands of years

It ain't going to stop now, whether you're for free trade or not.

[The Backlash Cometh]

14. Turn the tables on them.

How are they going to reinvent free trade so that it doesn't result in all the negatives that we've been experiencing?

They have us on the defense, and that keeps them from dealing with all the hard questions. We were right about free trade, and now what are they going to do about fixing the problems?

[ConservativeDemocrat]

15. I think you should look at the wiki-definition, madfloridian

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Populism

Populism is characterized by a sometimes radical critique of the status quo, but on the whole does not have a strong political identity as either a left-wing or right-wing movement. Populism has taken left-wing, right-wing, and even centrist forms. In recent years, conservative United States politicians have begun adopting populist rhetoric; for example, telling people to stand up to "the powerful trial lawyer lobby", "the liberal elite", or "the Hollywood elite". Also in recent years, "left-wing" United States politicians have increasingly begun adopting populist rhetoric; the use of the term "two Americas" in the 2004 Presidential Democratic Party campaign of John Edwards is an example of an attempt to employ Populist themes to persuade voters.

Like many wiki-entries, it's an interesting read.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[madfloridian]

18. I am using the term in the DLC context of our fighting them on "free" trade.

I don't know what I am, I have various views that are firm but don't fit patterns.

I do see clearly though, and I see that our country has changed forever because our party went along with a group that was only for business interests.

If you want to correct me on that, feel free.

Those jobs won't be coming back, more will be going. Because we gave in to a think tank on free trade.

[ConservativeDemocrat]

19. When criticizing someone, use their own terminology...

the way they define it. Otherwise, you're just constructing a straw-man for you to knock down.

The term "populism", in DLC speak, is largely defined as echos of the agrarian populism that was
strong in this country in the early 20th century, which was characterized by bigotry, anti-Catholicism,
anti-Semitism, and that viewed all business organizations, no matter how benign, as having destroyed
an "idyllic period in the past, when small producers were king, when communities never had to worry
about economic turmoil, and when Jeffersonian democracy prevailed".

And they see strong parallels of that movement with the reflexively anti-success, anti-American,
anti-semitic (couched in terms of anti-Israel), pro-rose-colored-glasses-on-US-history, Naderite
hard left of today.

( I'm getting this from a 2002 NDOL article here: http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?kaid=127&subid=177&contentid=250879)

They contrast that with the "Progressive" tradition, which they define as: fiscal discipline,
open markets, support for innovation and technological change, and sharply higher expectations for
schools combined with opportunities for lifelong learning. And that Progressives are the ones
to properly criticize what has happened in the past 6 years, just as they were the ones to clean
up the mess in the 20th century. To wit:

Progressives were outraged by the corporate wire-pulling of their day precisely because they represented betrayals of free enterprise: efforts to accumulate wealth through privilege and political influence rather than performance; to avoid competition through restraints on trade; and to use their artificial market power not to launch productive ventures but to run up private fortunes while shirking their duties to workers and investors.

In other words, they believe that it is both ineffective and immoral to lump Ben & Jerrys together with Halliburton,
which is what all this anti-"corporatist" populism really does.

Now, critique that if you will. But at least we've established a baseline on what they're actually saying.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[madfloridian]

26. Let me quote from the National Conversation...

instead of getting bogged in terminology which like the word "progressive" can mean anything the DLC wants it to mean...

"After six years of stagnant incomes, increasing inequality, rising debt and declining confidence, many Americans are rightly anxious about their economic futures.

But the last thing they need is an old populism that plays to their fear, anger and pessimism, and, in the end, will only make matters worse. Yet, there are unmistakable signs of a growing "populist" revolt against globalization, especially immigration and trade.

Just take that statement in and think about it. We are anxious and afraid, that part is so right. But we don't need a "populist" revolt against globalism?

Think about it. They are saying we should not fight back. Now that scares me.

Here is what the DLC said about the reason for their tax excempt status...and it is mostly based on "free" trade (not the "fair" trade that would benefit our country.)

The DLC responds that its exclusive purpose is to develop and promote its “Third Way” agenda and that some causes it has lobbied for—e.g., welfare reform, fast-track approval of free-trade agreements—got more Republican than Democratic votes in Congress.

http://www.correntewire.com/dlc_loses_tax_exempt_status

Words can mean anything...context is everything. But those jobs are gone and more are going.

[ConservativeDemocrat]

30. Fight back against whom?

How wide do you cast your net when you decry the villany of "globalism"? Is it:

• Third world workers who want jobs better than bare sustenance agriculture?
• The vast number of WalMart shoppers who choose low priced foreign goods over American brands?
• Economists who talk about the highly regulated social economies of India (and many others) in the 70s, compared to how well they're doing today?
• Illegal aliens?
• Legal aliens?
• Some abstract scapegoat "corporatist" you can blame, rather than admit shoppers care more about their own pocketbooks than abstract nationalism?

Believe me, the protectionist gambit has been tried. It doesn't work.
Hell, even with the War On Drugs it doesn't work. And Americans know this, even if often they don't admit it to themselves.

What we shouldn't put up with is crony capatalism. States forbidden by Bush and his cronies from bargaining for lower drug prices. No bid contracts. Union busting laws. The Republican tax code that charges corporations who employ U.S. citizens MORE than those who don't. Offshore banking for tax cheats. Sweetheart tax giveaways.

Do you think Americans have an inherent right, due to being born in this country, to earn more than people of equal talent born elsewhere? Is that what you mean by fighting against globalism?

Just asking.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[madfloridian]

31. Do you really think I am that stupid?

You are using every bit of terminology to put me on the defensive.

They gave our country away to the corporations, and it started with Willie C.

And it is continuing with the DLC.

They gave our country away, and you are using spin.

[ConservativeDemocrat]

36. So the enemy is.... "They"?

I suppose that's better than "Us". (with apologies to Pogo.)

I used no "terminology". I used English. To ask hard questions that have vexed minds more brilliant than I.
It's good to know that you've found such a simple response: pretend questions you don't want to consider
are "spin", that people asking them are calling you "stupid", scapegoat whole classes of Americans, and
of course, blame Clinton.

Hmmm.... Pardon me for asking, but have you ever considered working for FOX?

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[madfloridian]

38. Have I considered working for Fox??

That's one of the milder things said about me here.

[Truth2Tell]

42. The net is cast on none of your list

The net is not cast on the workers of this world. They are the victims.

The "villainy of globalism", as you aptly describe it, is found among the achitechts of the institutions that regulate and control it.

You say one true and obvious thing: "What we shouldn't put up with is crony capatalism."

Sadly, the institutions of "globalism" have spawned the worlds largest-ever orgy of merciless crony capitalism. WTO, NAFTA, FTAA, World Bank, IMF, ad nauseum. Enough crony capitalism to sink a planet. There's your "villainy". And I agree, we shouldn't put up with it.

[Heywood J]

45. I think you forgot a few words there.

The vast number of WalMart shoppers who choose artificially low priced foreign goods over American brands because they have no other option?

The only reasons China's goods cost so much less are because they peg their currency to lower their prices regardless of costs, they use contaminated materials, prison and sweatshop labor, and they can afford to dump until domestic products cannot compete.

[loudsue]

23. That is a good point, CD.

But the first point on the wiki definition is why populism is associated with the Democratic philosophy more strongly:

"Populism, by its traditional definition, is a political doctrine or philosophy that aims to defend the interests of the common people against an entrenched, self-serving or corrupt elite."

Democrats have always been centered more on empowering the masses. The self-serving corrupt elite that lives in our country are CORPORATISTS...i.e., they favor laws protecting and elevating corporate interests ABOVE the interests of the masses. Corporatism is fascism. THAT is why the DLC has no place in the Dem party.


:kick::kick::kick:

[madfloridian]

16. There was a meeting May 1 to redefine "populism"....

I wonder how that went? It was the first of the Idea Primaries that are setting the policy for the party.

The first primary event, "Giving Americans the Tools to Compete" will take place in Chicago, Illinois, on May 1, and will focus on the new social contract that gives Americans the tools to compete and take charge of their economic security, including providing universal health care, universal college, and lifelong education. The Chicago forum will focus specifically on how define a new populism that accepts the fact we can't retreat from the global economy, but instead seeks to expand opportunity for all Americans in the 21st century.

http://dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=254287&kaid=85&subid=108

And from Sirota's mail last night late:

http://www.workingassetsblog.com/2007/05/breaking_emanuel_blocks_dem_de.html

Rahm took the discussion of the trade deal off the table.

[paparush]

17. Hey, what's that loud sucking sound...

No, its not Bush's poll numbers.
No, its not Falwell's soul being fileted in hell.

Its our f#cking JOBS..our LIVELIHOODS..our FUTURE.

[SmokingJacket]

20. "Populist" is one of the few labels I feel totally comfortable with.

Yes, I hate free trade, and yes, I am a populist.

This will backfire because America has a *very* strong populist tradition. Some Republicans consider themselves populists, as well.

[Wiley50]

22. K&R

[baldguy]

24. "Free trade" is a myth.

What's needed is FAIR trade.

[loudsue]

25. You know what else burns my ass about this, madfloridian?

Ford LOST his election in Tennessee in 2006, did he not? And why in the hell does Illinois keep electing Rahm Emmanuel? We need to target him with a new, truly DEMOCRATIC candidate in the next primary he runs in. But he's got so damned much CORPORATE money behind him, it will be hard to get rid of his corrupted ass.

This is another reason I am REALLY leary of Barak Obama: he & Rahm are buddies (from Illinois), and Rahm helped Obama with DLC MONEY and mentoring when he was first running for the US Senate. I've read both of Obamas books, and he shares Emmanuel's philosophy right down the line...he just has a helluva lot more charisma than Emmanuel has (which, in this case, is dangerous for us).

The DLC and NDN (National Democratic Network) DO NOT support any candidates that "run on a populist agenda", by their own admission. In other words, if you care about sustaining the New Deal philosophies, these corporate toadies won't support you with their huge corporate funding.

Hillary Clinton takes a HUGE chunk of the DLC/NDN money, as her husband was the original sweetheart of the DLC.

:kick::kick::kick:


On edit: Oh, and by the way: DLC asshole Al From has, to my knowledge, NEVER held a federally elected office. Why in the hell should we be taking HIS word for anything? He doesn't represent ANY constituency, except corporations.

:kick::kick::kick:

[madfloridian]

27. They are in charge of the party's policies.

And you are right, it is frustrating. It is like it is almost too late now to stand up and fight back.

They meant it to be that way. They want to keep us in our place, those of us who don't want to give up the social safety nets, who don't want to give our country away through unrestricted trade.

Unfortunately, there are few speaking out that. They spin words, like "abortion greys", winning the middle ground on abortion. They are willing ot rebuild the military in a huge way with Bush still in control. That is a scary thing. We need to rebuild it but not while someone is in charge who is incapable of leading the country.

We just keep giving and giving.

I watched TV a while today, enough to see they are going to pick our candidate for us. I felt like all the enthusiasm was sucked out of me all over again. I heard Donna Brazile say something like why is Edwards still at 12%. Well, Donna, could it be because they are putting Gore in the poll when he is not running and sucking up polling that might go for Edwards?

Take a look at the front page of the DLC.
www.dlc.org

It is like they are keeping at least 3 large pictures of Ford there all the time to remind us that two consultants already called for him to chair of the DNC as well. It is a little memo to those of us who once thought we had the power to change things.

[TheFarseer]

28. I'm a Polulist and damn proud of it

I believe we should strive to trade only with countries with a similar standard of living. Of course this is not always possible since you can't grow bananas in Canada, Germany or Japan, just for an off hand example, but that should be the goal. The goal should not be to export all the jobs to the lowest cost workers or import the lowest cost workers. I want this Walmart nightmare to end now!

[sadiesworld]

29. Those left and right populist "strands"

represent about 80% of the people in this country.

I hope the corporatists are getting nervous, very nervous.

[Elwood P Dowd]

32. We haven't passed any free trade deals in decades.

It's not free trade when you ship both labor and capital out of the country to take advantage of slave wages and non-existent or lax labor and environmental policies. It's not free trade when you allow 80% of your trading partners 15-20 years to lower their tariffs while you lower yours almost immediately. It's not free trade when you have no VAT on imports, yet allow your trading partners to charge 20-50 percent VAT on your exports.

NAFTA, GATT, CAFTA, and all the others ARE NOT FREE TRADE! They are nothing but outsourcing and investment scams to enrich a few thousand CEOs and investors.

[porphyrian]

33. Who gives a shit what they call us?

Do they define who we are? Are we so obscure in our beliefs that it isn't apparent where we really stand and that these guys are full of shit? Fuck them. I'll wait for something important to wring my hands about.

[xchrom]

35. can these guys EVER get an original thought?

obviously shipping our jobs to china, india and bum fuck egypt ISN'T WORKING -- but critisizing ''leftist populists'' is?

what the fuck is wrong with these people -- are they so evil that their brains have been outsourced?

[Elwood P Dowd]

39. They get these talking points from the corporate lobby

People like that bastard Tom Donohue at the US Chamber Of Commerce cook this crap up.

[xchrom]

41. oh i know -- and they are damn good at framing their issue.

they have a megaphone and aren't afraid to use it.

[Critters2]

37. I wonder how they feel about poisioned dog food.

Really, that's all I could think as I read this. Globalization has real consequences, but some people won't see it until THEIR dog is sick.

[Raksha]

43. Here's the part of the OP that really scares me:

The key, though, is not just enacting a new array of government programs. It is rewriting the social contract to address the anxieties of hardworking Americans. And, it is rejecting calls from both sides of the political aisle for an old populism that plays to Americans' fears and adopting, instead, a new optimism that speaks to their aspirations, hopes and innate belief that the future can be better than the past. After all, that is the American experience.

This tells me they aren't looking for a new approach to so-called "free trade," not in any substantive way. What they are looking for is rather a new marketing plan, a new way they can repackage the old snake oil and peddle it to an increasingly skeptical "populist" American public ONE more time.

Remember all the propaganda about "retraining" we were hearing in the nineties? Yeah, America might lose some manufacturing jobs, they told us, but in return we were going to get something much better. Hordes of workers were going to "retrain" for those exciting and challenging new high-tech jobs that were going to pay MUCH better than those boring old manufacturing jobs. So a lot of people did just that...and then found themselves working at Wal-Mart because those high-tech jobs had also been outsourced.

Nope, I don't like all that talk about "a new optimism that speaks to their aspirations, hopes and innate belief that the future can be better than the past." I smell a con job, and I don't like it one bit.

[The Gunslinger]

44. Good call me a populist

Better than a Fascist.

[Jack Rabbit]

46. It's OK with me.

I'm a populist and I think free trade hurts most Americans and the poor in developing nations.

I accept the label proudly.

[pampango]

48. I don't believe that any trade is "free" but it is hard to argue that

poverty in China and India has not been substantially reduced thanks to trade. You can argue about the cost to US workers and others in the developed world (though Germany and the US are still the #1 and #2 exporting nations in the world), but the Chinese population (a quarter of the world's population) is much better off than under the shared destitution of the Mao era. They have a lot of environmental and safety issues resulting from rapid development, just as the US and other developed countries had at that stage of their development.

[Individualist]

47. kick

[sadiesworld]

49. kick

[Odin2005]

50. I'm a POPULIST and DAMN PROUD OF IT!

The DLC can go FUCK THEMSELVES!

[madinmaryland]

51. I don't hate free trade, I hate UN-FAIR TRADE!