Could America's Socialists Become the Tea Party of the Left?

[DonViejo]

No longer happy to languish in principled irrelevance, socialists are plotting a Sanders-like insurgency inside the Democratic party.

By ANDREW HANNA and TAYLOR GEE October 01, 2017

If America’s democratic socialists learned anything from watching Bernie Sanders’ deep run in the Democratic primary last year, it’s that they don’t have to be losers any more.

Inspired by the Vermont senator’s success at forcing leftwing ideas into the nomination battle, the nation’s largest socialist organization, the Democratic Socialists of America, has watched its dues-paying membership, which historically has hovered around 5,000, swell to 25,000. The DSA is still nowhere near the levels of the Socialist Party in 1920 when nearly a million people voted for Eugene Debs, but its members, too young to remember the Cold War much less the “red scares” of the 1910s and 1950s, aren’t content to sit quietly on the political sidelines, perennially irrelevant in a system built to sustain two major parties.

They want to win. And to do it, socialists are dispensing with their penchant for symbolic protest votes and their principled disdain for an electoral process they believe can’t deliver meaningful change. Sanders’ ability to run well in primaries across the country, say new DSA members, proved that democratic socialism isn’t destined for the kind of third-party tokenism that bedevils the Green Party and World Workers Party among others. And it has opened their minds to an electoral strategy that was until very recently considered heretical.

“The only viable electoral strategy is to work with the Democratic Party,” says Michael Kazin, the editor of leftist magazine Dissent. “There is no viable third party.”

The consequence of this willingness to play in the main arena is that a loose confederacy of splinter groups—socialists, anarchists, communists and leftists, all spearheaded by the DSA—are more willing than ever to sacrifice ideological purity for a chance to work as insurgent coalition inside the Democratic Party. The DSA leadership insists that it feels no loyalty to the Democratic National Committee, but it is eager to challenge Democrats on their own turf.

more
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/10/01/could-americas-socialists-become-the-tea-party-of-the-left-215661

[HughBeaumont]

1. Right wing extremists: Perfectly OK, according to America.

(Well, hey, am I WRONG? Because I'm not. Take a look at who runs EVERYTHING. Hint: it ain't people who think like us!)

Second Bill of Rights Democrats (and really, that's what we're talking about here): OMFGZ THEY SUCK FOR BOTH PARTIIIIIEEESSSSS THEYRE A POX ON AMERICA!! BEND THE KNEE TO OUR VERY SERIOUS PEOPLE!!!

Demonizing Democratic Socialists does Democrats no good. All you're doing is putting smiles on Trumpkin faces.

[leftstreet]

2. No comparison. The 'Tea Party' wasn't a grassroots movement

It was funded by Koch money and made to appear as a grassroots movement, but it never was

[JCanete]

20. very true. People keep wanting to pretend otherwise. Fox also had a huge role in astro-turfing it

through disproportionate coverage and early advocacy.

[Voltaire2]

3. I sure hope so.

If we keep offering people "more of the same only not as awful" we will keep losing.

[bagelsforbreakfast]

27. It's amazing people don't realize this yet... n/m

[brush]

30. What's amazing is some people don't realize the election was stolen.

[LakeVermilion]

4. The Koch's money provided

a gathering place for American faux-patriots. The Tea Party is a place for Republicans. Tea Party membership speaks to their ability to process facts and swallow the Kool Ade.

[greeny2323]

5. Property

We Americans like owning property. So, no thanks.

[Voltaire2]

8. democratic socialists are not communists. nt.

[GulfCoast66]

24. If you do not want to be considered Socialist

Stop calling your selves socialist. All word, including socialist, have defined meanings. If you call yourself a socialist then people will correctly believe you want the means of production held jointly. I have seen nor heard nothing for prominent Democratic Socialist to make me believe that is not their goal. I have heard them say that they are aware those goals cannot be obtained at this time. But not a rejection of those goals.

I am a social democrat. I want to harness capitalism for the good of the common people. Just like FDR. Like he and most all members of the Democratic Party I am a capitalist.

Socialist will continue their uninterrupted decades series off losses in the US and if they somehow usurp the Democratic Party the republicans are insured continued victories.

Have a nice day.

[Spy Car]

6. The Green-Tea Party has already cost us two presidential elections.

They hope to cost us more. Who needs Koch when they have Putin?

These are not allies.

[Voltaire2]

7. I don't think you quite understand what was intended by the analogy.

The tea party operates as a right wing populist faction in the republican party, not as a third party. The article is about the rise equivalent left wing populist faction within the democratic party. That has nothing to do with third party spoiler effects.

[Spy Car]

9. Oh I understand perfectly...

We have left-wing populists (who are the analogues of the right-wing populists in the Tea Party) who were once content to cost liberal Dempcrats elections, who now want to infiltrate and subvert the liberal values of our party.

Embracing anti-liberal populists demogoguery is the worst path Democrats could take.

Do we really want to follow the GOP into the angry irrational political extremism? Not me.

[H2O Man]

10. Legalize Lonnie Anderson's hair.

[leftstreet]

14. ...

[H2O Man]

16. In the late summer-

early fall of 2001, Al Gore grew a beard. Karl Marx had a beard. Environmentalists are bad, especially if they wear beards. What are they trying to hide?

[Voltaire2]

11. Populism need not be "irrational political extremism", it can instead be proposing substantive

reform of a corrupt system.

[Spy Car]

15. In the history of human civilization when populist movements have come to power...

violence, repression, and often political mass-murders have followed.

Populism leads to authoritarianism or totaltalitarianism every time.

There is no ideology more violently opposed to liberalism than populism.

The Democratic Party is a modern liberal party that has stood against populism from the time of the great anti-populist Franklin D. Roosevelt.

[leftstreet]

17. Yeah, these people look pretty scary

?1395270397

[Spy Car]

19. Tell us when populist revolutionaries taking power has turned out well?

Can you do it?

And movements that have embraced the clenched-fist salute have killed about 100 million people around the globe in acts of political violence during the life-time of living Americans, so i personally get no "warm and fuzzys" looking at this photo.

Clenched-fists, Nazi-salutes? Avoid both.

We should not take the anti-liberal path. Populism is a disaster.

[Exultant Democracy]

28. We are talking about elections not revolutions, come on be serious.

Arguing your own absurd points way off in left field isn’t having a discussion. If you want example of populist socialist rising to power using elections then post WW2 Western Europe would be the proper example to examine.

[Spy Car]

37. None of the social democracies in Western Europe...

came to power as a result of populist "revolutionary" rhetoric leading to power via the ballot.

The social democrats in Europe reject populism. They reject class-warfare and prize social cohesion. They also love their industries and other free-market enterprises that bring in the money to pay for their generous social programs.

What they don't have are populist demogogues in power. It's not Venezuela.

Be serious yourself.

[Exultant Democracy]

40. You are the only one talking about revolution.

This article is about a faction in a political party. Seriously I can't even figure out how you got there from here, it is beyond absurd. As soon as Bernie starts dressing in fatigues and walking around with an AK-47 you have a point, until then your point is nonsense.

[HughBeaumont]

31. Oh geeeeeeeeeez, Red bait much?

COME on, y'all.

[Exultant Democracy]

41. Yeah, very suspect behavior.

[Voltaire2]

35. Bolivia and Ecuador are both controlled by left wing populist parties.

Neither of them have suffered violence, repression, mass murders, authoritarianism, or totalitarianism.

[Spy Car]

38. Bolivia and Equador are countries with very poor human rights records.

In Bolivia it looks like Evo Morales is intent on becoming "Presidente-for-life" in defiance of the Bolivian constitution (after rejecting the results of a referendum to change the constitution was voted down by the people.

Bolivia is more of the Caudillo populism going dictatorial.

The government of Peru (like Bolivia) uses the resources of the state to clamp down on dissent, threaten, jail, and intimidate political opponents


If these are your examples of success, god help us.

[GulfCoast66]

21. I am sure that is true

The small fact that we have never seen a populist movement that did not quickly become extreme does not preclude it happening. I will not hold my breath.

[Upward]

39. Which Liberal Values Do You Speak Of?

The ones that looked to make sure we only go to war against nations that war on us or our allies? They were out on field day in 2002-2003.

The ones that sought to keep our financial system in order? Again. Out on holiday from 1998-2008, and beyond.

The ones that fight to spare us anti-competitive monopolies? Gone.

I could go on and on .. but there are reasons why our party has grown weaker and weaker in congress, and it's not because of Gerrymandering, or Russians, or anything that's changed in the last 10 years, it's because Democratic leaders have stopped fighting on the behalf of people who labor for a living.

[Adrahil]

32. I'm uninterested in ANY kind of populism.

I generally find it's focused on pre-determined answers, rather than a rational, evidence-based approach.

[jrthin]

26. Agree 100%. And everything they do

cost us more seats. They want to primary democrats; the effect is to elect republicans.

[JHB]

12. The Tea Party was just a rebranding of voters the Republicans cultivated...

...for decades so they could disown Bush's failures.

Without recognizing that fundamental aspect of the Teabaggers, any anaogizing about a Democratic/Left equivalent is forced to the point of journalistic malpractice.

[Voltaire2]

13. well perhaps, but it was also a genuine right wing populist political movement.

[Spy Car]

18. Yes, the Tea Party was a genuine right-wing populist movement.

That's a bad thing.

The last thing our party needs to do is to abandon liberal rationalism and follow the GOP into demogoguery and political irrationalism.

I can't believe I'm reading the arguement that we Democrats follow the Republicans into populism by embracing a Green-Tea Party.

*Shudder*

[JHB]

25. ...of people frantically scraping the Bush/Cheney bumper-stickers off their cars.

[MineralMan]

22. I strongly urge that we do not associate the two in any way.

It is the wrong comparison, altogether.

[jalan48]

23. Wanting more social programs to help people is a radical idea! It's just like wanting more

tax breaks for millionaires and billionaires. Yeah, that's it!

[WinstonSmith00]

29. Providing a basic standard of living

For every citizen. I wouldnt call that socialism id call that the right thing to do.

[brooklynite]

34. ...and you believe that a basic standard of living can be derived in a capitalist economy?

If you do, you're a capitalist and may be able to work to get it implemented.

If you don't, you're a socialist and won't be able to accomplish anything.

[Voltaire2]

36. wow if only the world were such a simple place.

[KG]

33. I lulz'd