So Bernie, how you doing?

171 posts / 0 new
Last post
NDPP

Bernie Says Sarah Sanders Should Dine in Peace but Resistance Digs In

https://on.rt.com/98pj

"Bernie Sanders came to the defence of Sarah Sanders after the White House press secretary was booted out of a Virginia restaurant for her politics. Daily Show host Trevor Noah said that such calls are meaningless as they 'come from those in a position of privilege.'

Simran Singh, an NYU professor and anti-racist activist chimed in on Twitter, arguing that 'civility' itself is a 'racially coded' concept and 'a power play by those who feel that white supremacy is under threat.' Among much of the #Resistance, Senator Sanders' comments appear to have fallen on deaf ears. 'We're about to lose all kinds of very important rights, but by god Bernie will go to the wall for the rights of conservatives to stuff their faces in peace..."

progressive17 progressive17's picture

I am glad people are beginning to realize bourgeois civility is a power structure. Some of the bourgeois controllers on this web site who hypocritically present themselves as political progressives try to enforce their superiority and dominance over others using these 'civility' precepts. They, by positioning themselves as spokespeople of the oppressed, do the best job of making sure nothing gets done for the oppressed. Talk Talk Talk!

josh

NDPP wrote:

What the New York Primary Victory of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Means

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2018/06/28/pers-j28.html

"...The defeat of Crowley demonstrates the peoples hostility towards the Democratic Party establishment. Despite the repudiation of Crowley, however, the politics of Ocasio-Cortez and the DSA offer no way forward for the working class. There is not a hint of socialism in her program (the word itself does not appear on her website), and both the candidate and the DSA have sought to downplay their connection. Anyone who suggests that her victory marks a shift to the left by the Democratic Party should be told, in no uncertain terms: Curb your enthusiasm!

The DSA is not fighting for socialism but to strengthen the Democratic Party, one of the two main capitalist parties in the United States, which shares responsibility with the Republican Party for all the crimes committed by American imperialism around the world and against the working class at home..."

If anything, she will be used, as Bernie was, as a political sheepdog to lead and steer Democratic 'lefties' back into the straight and narrow. 

There are socialist parties people can vote for.  But it's always nice to see there are folks who view the better as the enemy of the perfect.

josh

progressive17 wrote:

Yup. It's all a big con job. No indication how all of her promises will be paid for. However, as there was a big Bernie Bros aspect to the Trump campaign, I can see her driving all the Bros to Trump even more. I wonder if she is a GOP plant.

I'd like to know what plant you've been eating lately.  So I can stay away.

progressive17 progressive17's picture

Now now josh, you have to keep up your bourgeois civility so you can be a warrior at the vanguard of the oppressed classes! You have just done an ad hominem, which means you have conceded defeat. Thank you! You are all so considerate, conceding defeat after so little effort on my part.

1. She is either going to sell the voters down the river, Bernie Sanders-style, like NDPP is saying, or:
2. She is going to get defeated as her own party people support Trump.

josh

Not conceding defeat.  Just pointing out stupidity.

progressive17 progressive17's picture

Concession #2, josh. Why don't you make it 3? 

NorthReport
cco

Hey now, progressive17. There's an easy objective way to see who's correct here. You've predicted she'll be "squashed like a bug". In 120 days, the votes will be in. If you're mistaken, I trust you'll return and offer the same concession on your own behalf you're offering on josh's.

NDPP

Bernie Sanders Embraces the Anti-Russia Campaign

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2018/07/23/pers-j23.html

"For Sanders, who has a long history of opportunist and pro-imperialist politics in the orbit of the Democratic Party, the aim of the campaign was always to direct social discontent into establishment channels, culminating in his endorsement  of the campaign of Hillary Clinton. The Sanders campaign did not push the Democrats to the left, but rather the state apparatus of the ruling class brought Sanders in to give a 'left' veneer to a thoroughly right-wing party."

 

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

You know, NDPP, you are almost as much of a lunatic as Alex Jones. You honestly believe that Sanders spent his whole life as a fringe politician for the sole purpose of eventually giving "a 'left' veneer to a thoroughly right-wing party" to help Hillary win. Yeah, sure, and Sandy Hook was a false flag operation in which the victims were all crisis actors. Your descent into madness is rather sad.

NDPP

Thanks Michael same to you.

NDPP

Would the American People be Better Served by a Movement for a People's Party? (and vid)

https://www.rt.com/shows/on-contact/435757-us-political-system-sanders/

"Nick Brana, founder and executive director of 'Movement for a People's Party,' talks with journalist Chris Hedges about the US' two political party system, the need for third and fourth parties and his experience campaigning for Bernie Sanders in the 2016 presidential election."

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

During an election, they seem to have a four party system:  "vote Green!!" or "vote Libertarian!!".

Between elections (and following the face-plants of the Green and Libertarian parties in whatever was the last election) it's a closed, two-party system.

And between elections, it seems like the "real progressives" are too busy re-fighting battles that the Democrats lost to spend any time promoting the third or fourth party.  Better that Hillary lose one hundred times than that the Greens win once.

Until 2020, of course.

 

voice of the damned

Michael Moriarity wrote:

You know, NDPP, you are almost as much of a lunatic as Alex Jones. You honestly believe that Sanders spent his whole life as a fringe politician for the sole purpose of eventually giving "a 'left' veneer to a thoroughly right-wing party" to help Hillary win. Yeah, sure, and Sandy Hook was a false flag operation in which the victims were all crisis actors. Your descent into madness is rather sad.

It's possible(and I'm saying possible) that the Sanders campaign had the effect of "giving a 'left' veneer to a thoroughly right-wing party", without it being that he was explictly ordered to do that by the ruling class, the latter idea being how the trots make it sound with their phrasing about how "the ruling class brought Sanders in etc".  

I don't think that's quite on the same level as saying that Sandy Hook was a hoax. It's more like an armchair-leftist's cartoonish idea about how the political system works.

 

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
It's possible(and I'm saying possible) that the Sanders campaign had the effect of "giving a 'left' veneer to a thoroughly right-wing party", without it being that he was explictly ordered to do that by the ruling class, the latter idea being how the trots make it sound with their phrasing about how "the ruling class brought Sanders in etc".  

Did the Democrats ask Bernie to run, or did he choose to try to run for the Democrats by himself?

voice of the damned

Mr. Magoo wrote:

Quote:
It's possible(and I'm saying possible) that the Sanders campaign had the effect of "giving a 'left' veneer to a thoroughly right-wing party", without it being that he was explictly ordered to do that by the ruling class, the latter idea being how the trots make it sound with their phrasing about how "the ruling class brought Sanders in etc".  

Did the Democrats ask Bernie to run, or did he choose to try to run for the Democrats by himself?

Well, who do you mean by "the Democrats" here? The party chairperson, the congressional leadership, Obama, the DNC, or...?

I doubt there was any official request from the anyone in the party authorized to make such a request that Sanders run. And, even unoffically, I can't imagine that anyone who wanted Hillary to win was asking Sanders to run. Though, after he lost, they were almost certainly lobbying him to endorse Hillary.

voice of the damned

I'll also point out here that, since losing the nomination, Sanders has remained an independent. He would probably have joined the Democrats if his whole mission in life was to lend that party some of his progressive aura.

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

voice of the damned wrote:

It's possible(and I'm saying possible) that the Sanders campaign had the effect of "giving a 'left' veneer to a thoroughly right-wing party", without it being that he was explictly ordered to do that by the ruling class, the latter idea being how the trots make it sound with their phrasing about how "the ruling class brought Sanders in etc".  

I don't think that's quite on the same level as saying that Sandy Hook was a hoax. It's more like an armchair-leftist's cartoonish idea about how the political system works.

Well, the Sanders candidacy may have had that effect, but it was clearly not his plan. He wanted to get social democratic ideas out there in front of the voters, and he calculated (totally correctly, in my opinion) that he would get more media coverage for his policies if he ran as a Democrat rather than third party. Sanders is a very pragmatic person who wants to use his time and effort to get concrete results, not to advance some ideological formulation.

Aristotleded24

Michael Moriarity wrote:

voice of the damned wrote:

It's possible(and I'm saying possible) that the Sanders campaign had the effect of "giving a 'left' veneer to a thoroughly right-wing party", without it being that he was explictly ordered to do that by the ruling class, the latter idea being how the trots make it sound with their phrasing about how "the ruling class brought Sanders in etc".  

I don't think that's quite on the same level as saying that Sandy Hook was a hoax. It's more like an armchair-leftist's cartoonish idea about how the political system works.

Well, the Sanders candidacy may have had that effect, but it was clearly not his plan. He wanted to get social democratic ideas out there in front of the voters, and he calculated (totally correctly, in my opinion) that he would get more media coverage for his policies if he ran as a Democrat rather than third party. Sanders is a very pragmatic person who wants to use his time and effort to get concrete results, not to advance some ideological formulation.

It made sense for him to try and secure the Democratic nomination in 2016 go gain ballot access and name recognition at the time. However, I think that the Democrats have shown themselves not to want to become the party that Bernie wants them to. The DNC has consistently blocked any efforts at reform. Sure, there are left-wing challengers who are taking on corporatists in the party. Unfortunately, the results have been mixed. You do have your successes like Alexanria Ocasio Cortez in New York, however you also have examples like Chelsea Manning going down in flames in Maryland. Both the left and the corporatists are spinning the results to say that their way, not the way of their opponents, is the way to go, nothing changes over all, and none of it will make a clear impact on a neutral observer. It is true that progerssive Democrats won nominations in Vermont and Maryland. It is also true that the Democrats in both states are badly trailing the Republicans, and if the Republicans prevail, that will only give the coporatists more ammunition to say that going left is not the way to go.

Bernie has the name recognition and popularity that he could successfully pull off an independent challenge to run for President. He should do that. It would really solidify his credentials as being an outsider, having tried to work within The Establishment and trying a route outside. He might even win over Republican minded voters who would agree with him on key policy but can't vote for the Democrats because the Democratic brand is just too toxic to them.

Pages