"She is fairly well connected to the levers of power on the left."
Um, no... The long-running organizations of the actual Left -- promoting democracy, free speech, economic fairness, privacy, gov transparency, were anti-war, etc. etc. -- were steadily killed off during the Clinton admin and then the 21st century. What have replaced it are grotesque caricatures that carry a few similarly-styled slogans, but which practice totalitarianism. By the rank-and-file, unwittingly.
The Democratic Party is our biggest modern Trojan horse.
Your comment is appreciated, but тАЬthe leftтАЭ for decades has supported the ever-expanding administrative state, which has allowed govt to secure ever more control over people, from housing building code regulations, to retirement 401k saving limits, to college bureaucracy costs.
Yes. But there can certainly be all kinds of collective projects decided by majority will that go beyond national defense and roadways, including welfare projects. The administrative state is supposed to carefully implement the majority of people's wishes for that joint action -- nothing more, nothing less, no matter whether a current majority is Leftist or Rightist.
If you're a Leftist, I don't see how that should be any problem. But to the extent it deviates, at that point there's cause not just for Rightists but also Leftists to complain, as then it is not a Left/Right thing, it's a will-of-the-people thing. The "NPC" types among the self-identified "Leftists" today are not doing that. They blindly follow their masters; i.e. they've forgotten the responsibilities of democracy, not just its rights.
Since government nearly always deviates in practice from majority will, a pro-active responsive investigative media, followed by reactive protests by the people, *should* get the incumbency to toe the line. Obviously, to work effectively (unlike now), the formula needs continual criticism and renewal of the laws and their enforcement. On that, Jefferson and others said so since early in the country's history. So we're now figuring out how it's got to happen in our current crisis.
What happens when advocating for тАЬthe peoplesтАЩ wishesтАЭ becomes second to advocating for the bureaucracyтАЩs wishes?
Over time, all bureaucracies grow to further the bureaucrats, whether that is in public or corporate organizations.
Most say money is the root of all evil, but it is actually тАЬpowerтАЭ that corrupts. Money buys power, but many people with modest salaries/means become dictators when given control over others.
"What happens when advocating for тАЬthe peoplesтАЩ wishesтАЭ becomes second to advocating for the bureaucracyтАЩs wishes?"
Agreed that's a problem, no argument from me. Thing is, that's not Leftism. It's not even an ideology, it's just antisocial selfishness. It can happen whatever one's political leanings. Rightists should not confuse this disease, no matter how prevalent, with Leftism -- just as one cannot confuse the disease of obsessive and unlimited wealth accumulation with healthy capitalism.
Yeah, I can see what you mean. Why, with his noble history of protesting in the trenches for civil rights and the poor, and dragged away to jail himself, that must have been Bernie's first thought -- "Get offa my lawn!!"
Really just a person who comes from a thought tradition that places him on the "right side of history." If that is where you reside, whatever you do is correct. conversely, anyone who opposes you is by definition "wrong". There are no betrayals. There are tactical course corrections to meet the expediency of the moment which the benighted do not understand. See how it works. I have no doubt he will maintain his promnence.
I used to think it was his idealism. But if so, he would have risked "dying in battle", risking his political career (a la Tulsi), by standing up for ideals. If there's anything public figures understand, it is that the value of a lifelong public *message* is higher than tactics which thrown those (public) ideals into the bonfire.
But his *total* capitulation to Hillary proved I was wrong about him, including his jumping into the Hitler/Satan-ization of Trump. He has deeper motives. What they are, specifically, isn't obvious, but he is clearly part of this worldwide totalitarian push.
this is a man who went to the Soviet Union for his honeymoon. His ideals are authoritarian. Any means of obtaining power is in service to his ideals and thus right and proper. any opposition is wrong.
OK, fair enough. Yes, he's authoritarian, so my point above was that he preaches only democratic socialism, which is really just about its opposite. It's the sleight of hand of all Marxist *leaders*.
For those is coming at this from the Right, I've notice Marxism and democratic socialism are very often erroneously conflated. But it's just completely wrong: Democracy is authoritarianism's exact opposite.
What actually happened is that Marxists *hijacked* Leftism. But you sure won't hear that often!
What "left" do you have in mind? I think Adolph Reed is a genunine leftist, in theory and practice, and he would consider the idea of Clinton being connected to the left absurd. The same for Lisa Featherstone, who edited an entire book showing what a fraud Clinton was as both feminist and politician. As for "the levers of power on the left"? Where do you see them at work. In my opinion, we don't have a "left" in the U.S. and if we did, they wouldn't be connected to Clinton, so I'm curious.
Not really. The current POTUS is the former Vice President of the guy who froze her out of power in the Republican party. 2016 all but ensured she can never win a Democrat primary every again in her life.
She is fairly well connected to the levers of power on the left.
"She is fairly well connected to the levers of power on the left."
Um, no... The long-running organizations of the actual Left -- promoting democracy, free speech, economic fairness, privacy, gov transparency, were anti-war, etc. etc. -- were steadily killed off during the Clinton admin and then the 21st century. What have replaced it are grotesque caricatures that carry a few similarly-styled slogans, but which practice totalitarianism. By the rank-and-file, unwittingly.
The Democratic Party is our biggest modern Trojan horse.
Your comment is appreciated, but тАЬthe leftтАЭ for decades has supported the ever-expanding administrative state, which has allowed govt to secure ever more control over people, from housing building code regulations, to retirement 401k saving limits, to college bureaucracy costs.
Yes. But there can certainly be all kinds of collective projects decided by majority will that go beyond national defense and roadways, including welfare projects. The administrative state is supposed to carefully implement the majority of people's wishes for that joint action -- nothing more, nothing less, no matter whether a current majority is Leftist or Rightist.
If you're a Leftist, I don't see how that should be any problem. But to the extent it deviates, at that point there's cause not just for Rightists but also Leftists to complain, as then it is not a Left/Right thing, it's a will-of-the-people thing. The "NPC" types among the self-identified "Leftists" today are not doing that. They blindly follow their masters; i.e. they've forgotten the responsibilities of democracy, not just its rights.
Since government nearly always deviates in practice from majority will, a pro-active responsive investigative media, followed by reactive protests by the people, *should* get the incumbency to toe the line. Obviously, to work effectively (unlike now), the formula needs continual criticism and renewal of the laws and their enforcement. On that, Jefferson and others said so since early in the country's history. So we're now figuring out how it's got to happen in our current crisis.
What happens when advocating for тАЬthe peoplesтАЩ wishesтАЭ becomes second to advocating for the bureaucracyтАЩs wishes?
Over time, all bureaucracies grow to further the bureaucrats, whether that is in public or corporate organizations.
Most say money is the root of all evil, but it is actually тАЬpowerтАЭ that corrupts. Money buys power, but many people with modest salaries/means become dictators when given control over others.
"What happens when advocating for тАЬthe peoplesтАЩ wishesтАЭ becomes second to advocating for the bureaucracyтАЩs wishes?"
Agreed that's a problem, no argument from me. Thing is, that's not Leftism. It's not even an ideology, it's just antisocial selfishness. It can happen whatever one's political leanings. Rightists should not confuse this disease, no matter how prevalent, with Leftism -- just as one cannot confuse the disease of obsessive and unlimited wealth accumulation with healthy capitalism.
The grotesque seems to have replaced and excluded the good. Hence the branding problem.
Including those cooperating with the Democratic Party: This just in...
https://www.antiwar.com/blog/2023/10/04/eleven-activists-arrested-in-sen-bernie-sanders-office-demanding-diplomacy-instead-of-funding-more-war-in-ukraine/
Ah, shades of 2003 in my district. All of those 'D's who had peace protestors arrested for protesting the Gulf War are still in office here.
Yeah, trespassing is illegal. What's your objection, exactly?
No, trespassing is an Insurrection.
blah blah blah
Yeah, I can see what you mean. Why, with his noble history of protesting in the trenches for civil rights and the poor, and dragged away to jail himself, that must have been Bernie's first thought -- "Get offa my lawn!!"
The guy revealed himself since 2016 to be breathtaking con artist and Leftist shepherd for the Democrats. This is just the latest example.
IMO, anyone on the Left with a three-digit IQ, and who is not in denial, has moved on.
Really just a person who comes from a thought tradition that places him on the "right side of history." If that is where you reside, whatever you do is correct. conversely, anyone who opposes you is by definition "wrong". There are no betrayals. There are tactical course corrections to meet the expediency of the moment which the benighted do not understand. See how it works. I have no doubt he will maintain his promnence.
I used to think it was his idealism. But if so, he would have risked "dying in battle", risking his political career (a la Tulsi), by standing up for ideals. If there's anything public figures understand, it is that the value of a lifelong public *message* is higher than tactics which thrown those (public) ideals into the bonfire.
But his *total* capitulation to Hillary proved I was wrong about him, including his jumping into the Hitler/Satan-ization of Trump. He has deeper motives. What they are, specifically, isn't obvious, but he is clearly part of this worldwide totalitarian push.
this is a man who went to the Soviet Union for his honeymoon. His ideals are authoritarian. Any means of obtaining power is in service to his ideals and thus right and proper. any opposition is wrong.
OK, fair enough. Yes, he's authoritarian, so my point above was that he preaches only democratic socialism, which is really just about its opposite. It's the sleight of hand of all Marxist *leaders*.
For those is coming at this from the Right, I've notice Marxism and democratic socialism are very often erroneously conflated. But it's just completely wrong: Democracy is authoritarianism's exact opposite.
What actually happened is that Marxists *hijacked* Leftism. But you sure won't hear that often!
Oh gawd, not this "totalitarian left" schtick again. Don't you pay attention to fads? That one passed it's sell-by date *months* ago.
Fun fact: making a million identical posts all over the thread doesn't make your basic bitch MSNBC ideas more compelling.
In a thread where we are discussing a leading Democrat pol suggesting her political opponents need deprogramming?
Yeah, nothing totalitarian at all about reeducation camps.
On the тАЬleftтАЭ
She is NOT left.....there is no left in the US!
There are 2 Party's 1)supposedly centrist 2)Right wing maniacs.
Then there are the millionaires/billionaires so I should make this 3?
Only the last one, aka the Uniparty, is real . The other two are filled with actors to keep the Uniparty's show going.
No Left...uh, OK Jenny, if you say so.
No real leftists in power. Dennis Kuchinich may have been the last one
What "left" do you have in mind? I think Adolph Reed is a genunine leftist, in theory and practice, and he would consider the idea of Clinton being connected to the left absurd. The same for Lisa Featherstone, who edited an entire book showing what a fraud Clinton was as both feminist and politician. As for "the levers of power on the left"? Where do you see them at work. In my opinion, we don't have a "left" in the U.S. and if we did, they wouldn't be connected to Clinton, so I'm curious.
The American left is dead.
The neocons purged from the GOP by Donald Trump are wearing their skin.
Not really. The current POTUS is the former Vice President of the guy who froze her out of power in the Republican party. 2016 all but ensured she can never win a Democrat primary every again in her life.