Uniting the left is an unhelpful framing, in my view. The only way to have a party winning on majoritarian economic progressive policy (like FDR's era of the D party) is to take it over. To do this we have to split the D party with an insurgency, eject the establishment, corporatism, wall-street, donor driven wing and form a coalition on…
Uniting the left is an unhelpful framing, in my view. The only way to have a party winning on majoritarian economic progressive policy (like FDR's era of the D party) is to take it over. To do this we have to split the D party with an insurgency, eject the establishment, corporatism, wall-street, donor driven wing and form a coalition on economic policy. A 3rd party can't do it because the electoral system is so corrupted that the current duopoly can always win. (Although 3rd party may sometimes be a useful tactic.)
This requires welcoming into the coalition those who support its democratic-majority economic goals even if they have different views on the culture war issues (gunz, idpol, church, abortion, cops, race, etc.)
The Clinton/Obama/Biden/Perez-type Ds are consistently about 90% R in their actions. (They all but said they are never-trump Rs last year at the DNC and in the general campain.) It's time we force them out so they go join the party they really belong to.
So we need to split the party. Those who support establishment Ds (maybe they sincerely believe in lesser-of-two-evils or that Ds are substantially better on culture and equality) are not in the coalition that I want to be part of.
So, frankly, I'd rather have economically progressive/socially conservative voters in the coalition than liberal socials progressives who are ok with the Ds support of the economic status quo.
So uniting the left is a non-goal to me if you count as "left" the establishment Ds and their supporters who reject this concept of economic class war as a priority over the culture war.
I should go farther. So, in summary, the broad-based popular economic coalition we need must take over the D party. It has to do this by splitting it, driving a wedge and welcoming those who may be turned off by the D party's current culture stance. Hence if you oppose that kind of populism, as I understand Vaush does, then
WHY WOULD WE WANT UNITY with that kind of pseudo-leftist?
Uniting the left is an unhelpful framing, in my view. The only way to have a party winning on majoritarian economic progressive policy (like FDR's era of the D party) is to take it over. To do this we have to split the D party with an insurgency, eject the establishment, corporatism, wall-street, donor driven wing and form a coalition on economic policy. A 3rd party can't do it because the electoral system is so corrupted that the current duopoly can always win. (Although 3rd party may sometimes be a useful tactic.)
This requires welcoming into the coalition those who support its democratic-majority economic goals even if they have different views on the culture war issues (gunz, idpol, church, abortion, cops, race, etc.)
The Clinton/Obama/Biden/Perez-type Ds are consistently about 90% R in their actions. (They all but said they are never-trump Rs last year at the DNC and in the general campain.) It's time we force them out so they go join the party they really belong to.
So we need to split the party. Those who support establishment Ds (maybe they sincerely believe in lesser-of-two-evils or that Ds are substantially better on culture and equality) are not in the coalition that I want to be part of.
So, frankly, I'd rather have economically progressive/socially conservative voters in the coalition than liberal socials progressives who are ok with the Ds support of the economic status quo.
So uniting the left is a non-goal to me if you count as "left" the establishment Ds and their supporters who reject this concept of economic class war as a priority over the culture war.
I should go farther. So, in summary, the broad-based popular economic coalition we need must take over the D party. It has to do this by splitting it, driving a wedge and welcoming those who may be turned off by the D party's current culture stance. Hence if you oppose that kind of populism, as I understand Vaush does, then
WHY WOULD WE WANT UNITY with that kind of pseudo-leftist?