The "Far Left" is already being demonized

Politics & Elections
482

BLM, a group protesting police violence and discrimination…is anti-capitalist?
I always learn so much on the Dope!

Centrists right now are not having a great run either. That’s partly why there’s this scapegoating going on.
H.Clinton lost to the most unpopular republican candidate ever, and Biden just staggered over the finish line against him…must be someone else’s fault. We need to be more centrist!

In fairness though, I haven’t made my mind up on this, it’s an interesting topic. I think that policies like medicare for all are actually very popular, especially when you explain to people what they actually mean. But, OTOH, words like “socialism” are indeed still triggering within the US.

483

I forget who it was on this board who (very recently) noted that republicans NEVER fight to be centrist. They 100% pull right and have gotten the Overton Window moved right (which move the “center” to the right).

Sorry to whomever it was that said that. You deserve credit for it.

484

The Founders are anti-capitalist but the Organization (as little as there is) have taken no such stand.

The Founders dont really have any control.

485

This is a very interesting point.

The existence of Sanders-Trump voters shows that we are making a fundamental mistake in our understanding of the political spectrum. We are oversimplifying things to the point where our model is misleading.

A simple, linear Left ⟵⟶ Right scale is not an adequate way of understanding political allegiances today.

Sanders-Trump voters feel ‘screwed by the system’. They don’t want neoliberal mainstream Democrats or neoliberal mainstream Republicans. They don’t want ‘business as usual’.

They want to shake things up because the system is not working for them. They are doing badly and getting poorer, no matter how hard they work, and they reckon any change in the system is better than none. The economy is only working for the rich, and inequality is growing.

If Bernie convinces them that he can fix it, they will vote for Bernie. If Trump convinces them that he can fix it they will vote for Trump.

An oversimplified left-right scale doesn’t account for that.

486

waves hand It’s cool.

487

Yes, good point (whoever made it).
Right now, having just lost an election, if anyone should be thinking of moving back to the center, and promoting compromise solutions, it should be the GOP. But they’re not going to do that. Even now, it is only the Dems talking about ceding ground.

488

Cite?

489

I’ve been thinking about something like that. When I look at my RW Facebook friends who were and are spamming pro Trump anti Democrat nonsense…

Well, they sometimes mention AOC and socialism. But far more common is painting Democrats = Establishment = Bad.

They do this to the ridiculous extent of painting AOC as an establishment politician – apparently she and “the squad” control the party and bend Nancy Pelosi to their will with ease. I mean… that bears very little resemblance to the truth, which makes it challenging to fight. But it also seems to show that their problem with Democrats isn’t the left right scale per se, but the perception that Dems are Establishment and Republicans somehow are not.

490

Who lost the election as a whole is debatable at this time. Republicans gained in state governments, governer’s mansions and the house. Only in the senate and president did the Dems gain and it was a very favorable environment for both. I think this election went to the Rs but told them to move on from trumps poison.

Here in Colorado our odious R senator who spent all his time liking trumps ass and ignoring voters did 5 points better than trump. If the orange moron hadn’t drug the rest of the party down there is a good chance Republicans would hold the whole federal government.

491

Ans yet last I looked, they have little influence over policy. It’s not even clear to what degree AOC or others subscribe to the DSA platform, since they run as members of the Democratic party, not Democratic Socialist party.

The model that dominates American life this minute is the antithesis of Democratic Socialist, and if anything, that version of capitalism is gaining in strength, not weakening. The rise of the DSA campaigner is a reflection of this fact, and a reaction to it. It’s a reaction to the perversion of watching a CEO of a big pharma manufacturer enriching himself simply by announcing progress made in the development of a vaccine.

492

Where exactly have I ever called myself anti-capitalist? I’m not anti-capitalist at all.

This seems to be yet another case of putting imaginary arguments in other people’s mouths, so that you have an excuse to get all angry and shoot them down. In other words, setting up a straw man to knock down.

I suggest you listen to what people are actually saying, not what it suits you to imagine they are saying.

493

Flip all the results round. You think the Democrats would be saying “Well this shows Americans are center-left and it was just a vote against the presidential candidate”? You think Dems would say the election was theirs?

I don’t. I think it would be largely considered a failure, and Democrats would be thinking about where they went wrong. And I would agree with them. Who wins the white house matters, 200k+ Americans found that out the hard way, and we haven’t even seen all the ripple effects yet from things like stacked courts.

494

Centrism cannot fail; only be stabbed in the back by the Left.

495

Good, relevant article (despite the click-baity title):

496

No, but then again I think the dems aren’t very bright about politics. They don’t seem to care about local races or have a coherent plan at anything besides winning the popular vote and bitching that very few things that matter are decided that way. They need to figure out a way to win more districts and care about district level wins.

497

Relevant paragraphs from that article.

It is folly for progressives to avoid the obvious: The reason they are far from achieving their policy aims goes beyond the notion that moderate Democrats are clods who can’t play the game. There are many places in the country where progressives need better arguments to reach people who don’t currently support their goals.

The post-election memo by four progressive groups — New Deal Strategies, Justice Democrats, Sunrise Movement and Data for Progress — came closer to the mark than Ocasio-Cortez’s interview. It called for a new set of policy and rhetorical appeals that seek to merge the Black Lives Matter message with an economic message that would also appeal to less-prosperous and less-educated whites who have been attracted to Trump. There is not abundant evidence that this can be successful, but it is at least more attuned to the genuine challenge than scolding fellow Democrats for not being with it on Facebook.

498

Ah, perfect. Everything wrong in this thread compressed into a single word.

You (as in plural you) can’t (as in can’t be taken seriously) turn around 500 posts into a thread castigating centrists as meanies who are holding down the true believers and pretend they aren’t central to the party.

What conceivable evidence would it take to convince you? Here’s a chart from Pew Research.

Are you just playing word games about majority and plurality? Moderates remain the plurality and liberals are second. I’d put them together as centrists, between the very conservative and very liberal. Nevertheless, very liberal is a tiny minority. One that’s growing, which is all to the good, but not yet a dominant force.

Or we could look at Congress, where the Progressive Caucus has 40% of seats, still not a majority.

Or this article which analyzed the voting patterns in the blue wall states and Georgia. Biden got fewer votes than Clinton in Philadelphia and Detroit. His major pickups were in suburban counties around them, Milwaukee, and Atlanta. Suburban women have been a focus all through the election. Which is more likely to be true: they were actually hiding hordes of hundreds of thousands of far-left voters or they were centrists swayed by Biden?

For the past year in threads here the far-left has refused to accept any blame and just as adamantly refused to consider well-meaning advice. It’s all over this thread like toxic mold. As someone much closer to a progressive than a moderate I find that as infuriating as it is self-defeating.

499

All of them.

Literally every single item on your list is popular now.



Policies with the support of an outright majority of people are popular policies.

That is inherent in the meaning of the word “popular”.



There are also popular people who think evil aliens exert malicious influence on human brains.

But this has limited relevance for politics.



You start by making the position popular.

A political party should base exactly 0% of its electoral campaigns on positions that are disfavored by the majority of voters in its own party.

Activists need to convince the public first, or else win legal victories not dependent on elections, before major elected officials start waving the banner on these issues.



Interracial marriage is actually an instructive example.

It’s the only item on your list that was wildly unpopular at the time of legal victory (Loving v Virginia). And what did civil rights leaders of the 60s do on the topic?

They de-emphasized it in their pursuit of goals that were more broadly popular at the time. The Civil Rights Act, for example, had an outright majority of public support even during the 1960s. That doesn’t mean that civil rights leaders didn’t believe in the issue. MLK, for example, clearly said that he thought it should be legal. But he also stated that it was not a primary goal, as he downplayed concerns that other civil rights gains would lead to more interracial marriages. “School integration has not led to an increase in [interracial] marriages. The basic aim of the Negro is not to become the white man’s brother-in-law, but his brother.”



Civil rights leaders of the time were incredibly sophisticated about message discipline, on such an extreme level that practically no one understands it today.

But then, they had legitimate goals they were genuinely trying to achieve.

It wasn’t just empty moral posturing for them. They actually cared if they succeeded, rather than the unfortunate strain of people who care merely about being seen in public furiously flying the correct flag while being utterly indifferent to actual political success which has a chance of making people’s lives better. There is an unfortunate tendency of the internet that it can seem to signal boost empty but furious flag waving, to the detriment of sophisticated and effective political organization.

Elected officials should, of course, support policies they believe to be good even if the majority of people in their own party disagree.

They should also de-emphasize those policies for the present, and instead emphasize policies with broader support. That is, if they care about building a winning coalition more than they care about their own celebrity.

500

Sure. But what we were talking about, was which party should be talking about moving further towards the center and controlling their more fringe elements?

In an election where Dems kept the House but lost some seats, almost took the senate, maybe losing it by one seat, and won the presidency…you consider the Republicans to be the overall winners. Well, ok, that’s debateable, but sure, if you like.

But regardless, it seems once again Dems are being introspective and thinking about how to move more to the center, and republicans…are not. And if the election results were reversed…Dems would see it as a loss, and start thinking about how to broaden their appeal and soften their policies and republicans would not. That’s a problem for the future (and present) politics in the US. Because it’s just giving away more and more, and doesn’t seem to be delivering the promised results.

501

Right, but my point is they should consider it a victory. You’re right they would call it a loss since they would lose the celebrity jobs but they would be able to determine districts and controll judiciary appointments. That is where they could institute a liberal agenda for the next decade. As it is nothing will happen for the next two year then the Rs will gain the house with the new districts they get to draw.