Is Bernie's campaign a revolution or the progressive movement's last stand

[mmonk]

Last edited Tue Jan 19, 2016, 10:43 AM - Edit history (1)

or both? Or neither. Discuss. Note: I edited to include neither.

[Kentonio]

2. Well, if it's our last stand, I intend to go out in style.

:

[cantbeserious]

3. This Is The Last Stand For Citizen Driven Democracy

eom

[NCTraveler]

4. Both. Big time!!!nt

[Katashi_itto]

5. Both. With Hillary or a Republican in office. Will take Generations to undo the damage, if ever.

[Recursion]

6. Neither

It is not a revolution, and it is not remotely the last stand of American Progressivism.

[brooklynite]

7. Neither...

...there are progressive and moderates today; there will be progressive and moderate tomorrow. Neither faction is going to go away if their candidate loses.

[onehandle]

8. No.

Answer and discussion wrapped up in one word.

[Donkees]

9. "...and it's been going on for ten thousand years"

Take your place on the great Mandala
As it moves through your brief moment of time
Win or lose now, you must choose now
And if you lose you're only losing your life

Tell the jailer not to bother
With his meal of bread and water today
He is fasting 'til the killings over

He's a martyr, he thinks he's a prophet
But he's a coward, he's just playing a game
He can't do it, he can't change it
It's been going on for ten thousand years

Take your place on the great Mandala
As it moves through your brief moment of time
Win or lose now, you must choose now
And if you lose you're only losing your life

Tell the people they are safe now
Hunger stopped him, he lies still in his cell
Death has gagged his accusations

We are free now, we can kill now
We can hate now, now we can end the world
We're not guilty, he was crazy
And it's been going on for ten thousand years

Take your place on the great Mandala
As it moves through your brief moment of time
Win or lose now you must choose now
And if you lose you've only wasted your life

Songwriters
Mary Allin Travers;Peter Yarrow;Albert B. Grossman

[hack89]

10. Neither. Just the latest in a long string of populous Presidential candidates.

there is nothing transformational about Bernie.

[stonecutter357]

11. the progressive movement is doing fine

you don't get to choose who is and who is not a progressive. Bernie's campaign is not a progressive revolution.

[Still In Wisconsin]

18. If Hillary wins the progressive movement will have ended.

Liberalism and "the Left" are not tolerated among the "pragmatic" Clinton inner circle.

[stonecutter357]

23. Hillary is the progressive movement .

[Still In Wisconsin]

32. When exactly did the progressive movement become about accepting the status quo as unchangable?

No, Hillary is not the progressive movement. She is the "progressivism is unrealistic so let's take what we can get" movement.

[1StrongBlackMan]

12. As others have noted, Bernie's campaign is neither, a revolution , nor the progressive movement's ..

last stand. But I will suggest that the framing of the questions betrays a certain mentality that I see as, largely, what ails political discourse, today.

It seems that every discussion is hyperbolic, casting the three candidates as good versus evil (when they essentially stand for the same things, though with different timing and different tactic) and a one time event.

[mmonk]

16. I asked the question due to recent events such

as aspects of Social Security have been on the table and the repeal of Glass-Steagall and Too Big To Fail flies in the face of the progressive movement's anti-trust past. Therefore, I don't think my question to stir some discussion is hyperbolic.

[1StrongBlackMan]

24. You don't see calling the Bernie campaign a "revolution" and ...

the last chance for the American progressive movement hyperbolic?

First, "revolutions" do not work within the (electoral) system that it seeks to change. Secondly, as others have noted, there will always be progressives working to improve upon American policy.

I get why some attempt to frame it in the manner they do ... it makes it all about a noble mission to spark emotional attachment.

[mmonk]

25. The term revolution is the campaign's term.

Therefore it's usage in my question.

[1StrongBlackMan]

27. I understand that. But the/a campaign isn't a revolution; and ...

should the campaign fail, it will not/does not mean the end of the progressive movement.

[mmonk]

29. Thank you for your answers.

[Agschmid]

20. Nailed it.

[FSogol]

28. +1 Well said. n/t

[LWolf]

13. Both. nt

[kenfrequed]

14. We don't see a candidate like this very often

Maybe once in a generation we get a candidate that is both very leftist and very viable. Believe me I have caucused and supported a lot of candidates both local and national that were from the progressive wing of the party and a lot of them I suspected were not going to get the nomination so I would end up voting for the democrat that was my second (or third choice) in the general elections.

I don't imagine there are going to be a lot of purely people funded progressives that make it this far in the future either. If we fail on this I just don't think there is going to be a big enough challenge to citizens united or a challenge to how we fund our elections.

Of course the politically active (such as myself) will still have a stiff drink and go out and hold their nose and pull the lever for Hillary. But, the portion of the electorate both moderates and young voters will be a little disenchanted with the process and rather than encouraging this group it will actually diminish their participation. We are actually less likely to be able to win back congress as without massive activism we will not be able to overcome the gerrymandering that gave republicans control of the house. We will also have a much harder time taking back the senate (though I think we might still pull it off if barely)

The republicans will define Hillary as being ultra-leftist and they will move the bean again a bit more to the right and thereby try to change the definition of moderate. Again.

There will be little or no challenge to the corporate machine.


However...

One does not necessarily need to win to be a transformational candidate. It makes it more likely, but it isn't guaranteed. It is possible that merely by running and managing to make it this far and activate people this much that there is going to be a shift in the party or the build up of a group within the party to challenge the current third way/establishment Democratic party.

From a look at the movement within the Democratic party you see that the DLC is dead having gone defunct after being completely discredited. The Blue Dogs are an endangered species, having been no end of trouble during President Obama's first two years by giving too much filibuster cover to the republicans. And the Third Way seems an isolated group that has absorbed many of the adherents from the previous groups but really hasn't excited a lot of actual politicians as there hasn't been a "Reagan Revolution" to make Democrats run to the middle to support their absurd, quixotic, search to position themselves at a compromise while attracting corporate donors.

The Congressional progressive caucus is the largest Democratic group within congress and shows no sign of fading.

If Bernie loses the nomination it is still possible that a lot of his supporters, having gone to caucus for him or push him in the primaries will stay active in the party and they might continue to push. There may also be candidates that see what Bernie has done and decide to run from that angle as well. Bernie could still be the part of a big change within the party.

[mmonk]

31. Thanks for your detailed answer.

[Armstead]

15. I would prefer that be a comproimise instead of Either/Or.

Last stand? Dunno. But these internal schisms are totally stupid, in my humble opinion. Moderate Liberal and More Progressive is not a bad thing, IF that means both are pushing in the same direction. But when it means they are pulling in opposite directions, that is a recipe for.....well, what has happened since 1980. The emergence of an unchallenged Oligarchy, with no effective opposition and no real counterbalance to the GOP.


What is absolutely maddening about the modern Democratic Party is that Moderate Liberal/Progressive has been re-branded as Fringe Left and Radical when it comes to issues of wealth and power.

And Corporate Conservative as been rebranded as "Centrist" and "Pragmatic."

The Democrats have changed to an assumption that this is a Center Right Country, rather than a country in which Liberal and Conservative have equal shots.

Therefore liberal goals are denigrated and dismissed by the damn political party that is supposed to be defending and fighting to advance them.

That is totally fucked. There should be a party that is equally comfortable for Moderate Populist Liberals and those who are further to the Left , within the broad spectrum of center to left.

[mmonk]

21. How about an attempt at reestablishment of core principles?

[Still In Wisconsin]

17. If Shillary is elected, the choice then becomes Repub Lite Party vs. Full-on Teabag Party

[mmonk]

19. Or is it an attempt to reestablish core progressive ideas?

[Renew Deal]

22. Neither

Sanders is a 1.0 candidate. The promise of Sanders candidacy will be seen in 2020 or 2024.

[Motown_Johnny]

26. It could be the last stand against Citizens United. But not the entire progressive movement.

The progressive movement is ongoing. The Red Queen Effect comes into play. Because the conservatives are always trying to move us backward, we must continue to try and move forward just to stay in the same place (something that anyone who doesn't want to even try for single payer does not comprehend).




It isn't a revolution in the technical sense because revolutions are "a forcible overthrow of a government or social order in favor of a new system".

It could be revolutionary, but not a revolution in the technical sense.



Sorry, I need to vote neither.

(IMO) It is a revolutionary phase in the endless march of social progress.

[mmonk]

30. I like the distinction you make between revolution

and revolutionary.