Skip to content


No Reforming Democrats: Leftist Dogma or Scientific Fact?

No Reforming Democrats: Leftist Dogma or Scientific Fact?

dissidentvoice.org
By Patrick Walker

I must start by clarifying: I am no fan or todays Democratic Party, and I strongly suspect the leftist hypothesis that todays jackass party is beyond reforming is most likely true. But until strenuously tested, it is merely a hypothesis, while the Left treats it as a religious dogma that must be protected from all rational scrutiny.

For the sake of our nations common good mostly likely, for the sake of saving human civilization from encroaching climate destruction I think we must expose the hypothesis that Democrats are beyond reform to testing by purely rational experiment.

The experiment I propose is massive organized voter revolt, by means of Revolt Against Plutocracys Bernie or Bust pledge. If Democrats wont reform say, by dumping Hillary Clinton for Bernie Sanders in the face of massive organized voter rejection of Clinton, U.S. voters will have compelling public proof that the Left has been right all along. In other words, voters will know as fact what the Left has long asserted as dogma: that the Democratic Party establishment is so addicted to feeding at the corporate trough that its willing to sacrifice even the presidency for that purpose. To the extent that it will insist on nominating Hillary Clinton, the foremost exemplar of corporate trough-feeding, a presidential candidate diametrically opposed to the partys New Deal and Great Society heritage and largely detested by the partys progressive base.

Now granted, this is a social science experiment, one being conducted on an institution (the Democratic Party) whose own nature depends on changing human opinion, so the experiment lacks both the rigor and enduring validity that characterize the physical sciences. Perhaps a different experiment from the organized rejection of Hillary Clinton would yield a different result, or perhaps a similar experiment conducted years down the line (after opinion supporting the Democratic Party has had time to change) would again come out differently.

But social science experiments differ from physical science ones in another crucial way: that experimenters have far less control over establishing the best experimental conditions and must often wait on history to supply them. And often, what we need to know in a social science experiment is not whether a certain result will be possible years down the line, but whether its possible now. Id argue that the repeated long-term raising and quashing of populist hope, combined with the Democratic presidential run of a candidate (Bernie Sanders) sufficiently uncorrupted by money to work for that hope, offers the perfect experimental conditions for organizing massive voter revolt against the party establishment and testing whether this revolt has a reforming effect on Democratic Party behavior. If the party machine still pushes to nominate Clinton despite a massive refusal by its base to vote for her (as expressed in the Bernie or Bust pledge), well have compelling public evidence as compelling as one can achieve in the social sciences that the Left has been right all along in asserting the Democratic Party is beyond reform.

And we couldnt have that evidence at a better time than now, since the unwillingness of Democrats to reject fossil fool candidate Hillary Clinton, bought off by oil and gas money, means a just plain silly energy policy heavy on fracking, when its imperative to keep 80 percent of fossil fuels in the ground. If the Democratic Party establishment is sufficiently hell-bent on maintaining its corruption to foist climate criminal Clinton on voters vehemently opposed to her, then that, alongside Republicans outright climate change denial, is truly dismal news for humanity. But its news both the climate movement and U.S. voters desperately need to know.

And, given voters desperate need to know the truth about Democrats, we arrive at a very unflattering picture of the U.S. political Left, whod rather treat Democrats imperviousness to reform as religious dogma than risk putting it to a much-needed empirical test.

This dogma reflects, on the one hand, very bad will. Why? Because in a two-party system desperately needing reform (with the very climate at stake), the only obvious fast path to reform is to overhaul Democrats, the better of the two major parties. But the Left, ideally situated to exercise pressure on Democrats, instead prefers a self-righteous standoffishness from that party and blanket condemnation of its voters to trying to organize them to make demands on the party demands which, if unmet, would prove to Democratic voters the partys incapacity for reform in a way leftists mere preaching of their anti-Democrat gospel never could. Such as the demand made in the Bernie or Bust pledge: to nominate Bernie Sanders and reject Hillary Clinton at the cost of pledgers voting Green or writing in Sanders if the demand is not met. At the small cost of potentially electing Sanders (a vastly superior candidate to any other with a shot at winning), the Left could have definitive public proof of what it claims to know anyway: that the Democratic Party establishment is too corrupt to let Sanders win.

For people so cocksure of knowing something something I myself suspect is true leftists seem very afraid (as I am not) of putting it to an empirical test. As stated, this reflects considerable bad will. For any good-willed person, knowing the urgency of reform, wants the Democratic Party to be reformable even if highly skeptical of that prospect. Any path to reform not involving reforming Democrats likely involves electing Republicans while a third party like the Greens becomes viable at the price of considerable social pain, climate destruction, and (quite probably) protesters being labeled terrorists and hauled off to dark sites, or even shot in the streets. There is no potential avenue to reforming Democrats but a willingness to play electoral chicken threatening to withhold votes from Hillary Clinton if shes nominated but given the likely level of social pain involved, I fully understand why a man of conscience like Noam Chomsky encourages voters in swing states to vote for Clinton in the general election if shes the nominee. But without such organized electoral chicken, what real prospect do progressives (above all, climate justice ones) have of exercising any influence over Clinton, who will drop all pretense of being progressive and will simply guilt progressives with lesser-evil argument (probably even citing Chomsky) once shes the nominee.

But beyond bad will, leftists unwillingness to put their dogma of Democrats incapacity for reform to an empirical, voter-convincing test reveals the Lefts loss of any instinct for political organizing. For Sanders supporters, especially young ones (many, veterans of the Occupy movement), have poured immense energy and enthusiasm into his campaign. And beyond that energy and enthusiasm, what makes Sanders supporters such ripe subjects for leftist organizing, is that Sanders places strong emphasis on the need for political revolution.

Granted, Sanders view of revolution may be a laughably tame one; but frankly, the only fault I find with it is his persistent unwillingness to identify Clinton and the Democratic Party establishment as outright enemies of the needed revolution. Given the increasing nastiness and dishonesty of the pro-Clinton party establishments attacks on Sanders, along with the undemocratic measures theyve taken from the get-go to sabotage his campaign and thwart his nomination, convincing Sanders supporters that Clintons the foremost enemy of his revolution should not be terribly hard. Yet failure to do so, should Clinton win the nomination and Sanders then endorses her (as hes virtually certain to do), will cause his supposed revolution to disappear without a trace once shes nominated; one cant simultaneously endorse a candidate and make that candidate a target of revolution. The sad truth about Bernie is that of his conflicting beliefs in lesser-evilism and revolution, revolution is the one hes willing to sacrifice. But the Left, like Revolt Against Plutocracy, should have seen the immense opportunity to organize the undoubtedly large number of his supporters who feel Bernie should have sacrificed lesser-evilism instead. What, after all, is the point of invoking political revolution you intend to call off within months if youre not nominated? Yet the Left still has the prospect of organizing Bernies revolution-minded supporters by putting its resources behind the Bernie or Bust pledge.

Whether the Left exploits this unique organizing opportunity to build a movement that could endure and grow no matter who gets elected is ultimately a choice between science and religion. As philosopher Daniel Dennett notes in his book Breaking the Spell, a chief function of the concept of the sacred is to forbid empirical investigation of religious beliefs. In leftists refusal to support demands that put the Democratic Party to the test even though Democrats failing that test could reward the Left (and the Green Party) richly I see an equally dogmatic defense of leftists sacred, identity-giving belief that Democrats are beyond reform. And the related dogmatic belief that any candidate running as a Democrat must be denied support even if hes attempting a hostile takeover of the party. Yet only by putting their religious dogma to an empirical test whether the Democratic establishment still embraces Clinton despite organized voter rejection can leftists hope to exploit the unique organizing opportunity Sanders candidacy offers.

Patrick Walker is an activist author and co-founder of Revolt Against Plutocracy, originators of the controversial Bernie or Bust pledge. Read other articles by Patrick.

View the original article at dissidentvoice.org

Related Posts with Thumbnails

Posted in Analysis & Review, Politics, Revolutions & Coups.

Tagged with , , , , , .

Support #altnews & keep Dark Politricks alive

Remember I told you over 5 years ago that they would be trying to shut down sites and YouTube channels that are not promoting the "Official" view. Well it's happening big time. Peoples Channels get no money from YouTube any more and Google is being fishy with their AdSense giving money for some clicks but not others. The time is here, it's not "Obama's Internet Cut Off Switch" it's "Trumps Sell Everyones Internet Dirty Laundry Garage Sale".

It's not just Google/YouTube defunding altenative chanels (mine was shut), but Facebook is also removing content, shutting pages, profiles and groups and removing funds from #altnews that way as well. I was recently kicked off FB and had a page "unpublished" with no reason given. If you don't know already all Facebooks Private Messages and Secret Groups are still analysed and checked for words related to drugs, sex, war etc against their own TOS. Personally IU know there are undercover Irish police moving from group to group cloning peoples accounts and getting people booted. Worse than that I know people in court at the moment for the content they had on their secret private group. Use Telegrams secret chat mode to chat on, or if you prefer if you need to or buy a dumb phone with nothing for the NSA to hack into if you are that paranoid.

So if your not supporting this site already which brings you news from the Left to the Right (really the same war mongering bollox) then I could do with some. Even if it's just £5 or tick the monthly subscription box it will be much appreciated. Read on to find out why/

Why?

Any support to keep this site would be appreciated. You could set up a monthly subscription for £2 like some people do or you could pay a one off donation as a gift.
I am not asking you to pay me for other people's articles, this is a clearing house as well as place to put my own views out into the world. I am asking for help to write more articles like my recent
false flag gas attack to get WWIII started in Syria, and Trump away from Putin. Hopefully a few missiles won't mean a WikiLeaks release of that infamous video Trump apparently made in a Russian bedroom with Prostitutes. Also please note that this article was written just an hour after the papers came out, and I always come back and update them.

If you want to read JUST my own articles then use the top menu I have written hundreds of articles for this site and I host numerous amounts of material that has seen me the victim of hacks, DOS plus I have been kicked off multiple hosting companies, free blogging sites, and I have even had threats to cease and desist from the US armed forces. Therefore I have to pay for my own server which is NOT cheap. The more people who read these article on this site the more it costs me so some support would be much appreciated.

I have backups of removed reports shown, then taken down after pressure, that show collusion between nations and the media. I have the full redacted 28/29 pages from the 9.11 commission on the site which seems to have been forgotten about as we help Saudi Arabia bomb Yemeni kids hiding in the rubble with white phosphorus, an illegal weaapon. One that the Israeli's even used when they bombed the UN compound in Gaza during Operation Cast Lead. We complain about Syrian troops (US Controlled ISIS) using chemical weapons to kill "beautiful babies". I suppose all those babies we kill in Iraq, Yemen, Somalia and Syria are just not beautiful enough for Trumps beautiful baby ratio. Plus we kill about 100 times as many as ISIS or the Syrian army have managed by a factor of about 1000 to 1.

I also have a backup of the FOX News series that looked into Israeli connections to 9.11. Obviously FOX removed that as soon as AIPAC, ADL and the rest of the Hasbra brigade protested.

I also have a copy of the the original Liberal Democrats Freedom Bill which was quickly and quietly removed from their site once they enacted and replaced with some watered down rubbish instead once they got into power. No change to police tactics, protesting or our unfair extradition treaty with the USA but we did get a stop to being clamped on private land instead of the mny great ideas in the original.

So ANY support to keep this site running would be much appreciated! I don't have much money after leaving my job and it is a choice between shutting the server or selling the domain or paying a lot of money just so I can show this material. Material like the FSB Bombings that put Putin in power or the Google no 1 spot when you search for protecting yourself from UK Police with "how to give a no comment interview". If you see any adverts that interest you then please visit them as it helps me without you even needing to give me any money. A few clicks per visit is all it takes to help keep the servers running and #altnews alive!

However if you don't want to use the very obvious and cost free ways (to you) to help the site and keep me writing for it then please consider making a small donation. Especially if you have a few quid sitting in your PayPal account doing nothing useful. Why not do a monthly subscription for less money instead. Will you really notice £5 a month?


0 Responses

Stay in touch with the conversation, subscribe to the RSS feed for comments on this post.



Some HTML is OK

or, reply to this post via trackback.



css.php