General Discussion
Showing Original Post only (View all)"Baby, You're a Rich Man" [View all]
Elite: a group of persons exercising the major share of authority or influence within a larger group:
the power elite of a major political party.
There are some interesting discussions on DU:GD as of late, often focusing on the words liberal elite, that include attempts to marginalize Democrats who were/are participants in the Sanders Revolution. As someone who continues to support Bernie I have since first meeting him circa 1982 I thought it might be worthwhile to express a few thoughts here. I understand that the majority of current forum members will likely disagree with what I say here, and that is fine. I have never been concerned about if my opinions are in the majority or minority. As Gandhi noted, even if one is alone in their understanding of Truth, they should speak.
Every group with more than eight members will have a hierarchy. If a group has millions of members, it will, by definition, include a group of persons exercising the major share of authority or influence within (the) larger group. Therefore, it would be reasonable to believe that the Democratic Party has elites, and unreasonable to hold that it doesn't.
All organizations with millions of members must, by definition, operate by means of a stratified bureaucratic system. That includes the Democratic Party. That stratification involves having some that are at the top. However, the lower levels also have power. In an organization that works well, those at the different levels work in a coordinated manner, to increase results that benefit everyone.
There are, of course, more than two levels within the party. Between the grass roots and the national leadership are local, county, and state Democratic Party committees. While this structure is similar to that found in the republican party, its functions are distinct: republicans as a rule campaign and vote for whoever their candidate is, while Democrats frequently invest their energies in those candidates that most represent their opinions, beliefs, and values.
If we consider why the Democratic Party has lost so many House, Senate, and state elections in recent years, it would seem important to assess if these levels are coordinating to benefit all. That requires that we understand, accept, and respect the fact that there are a variety of opinions, beliefs, and values involved here. Pretending that anyone who has different opinions, beliefs, or values than ourselves must be a bircher or enemy of the party is to be part of the concrete thinking that prevents positive change and positive changes are clearly required if our party is to start winning more elections.
The differences between the two major groups within the party can best be understood by recognizing the differences between liberal and progressive members. Liberals believe the political-economic-social structure is basically sound, and merely requires some fine-tuning in order to be more fair to all. Progressives believe that structure prevents social justice, and requires a major overhaul. This core difference causes tensions within the party. This is where the Democratic Party faces its greatest challenge: if both sides work together for the commo0n good, we will win the vast majority of future elections; if we are divided, we will lose, even to the worst opposition possible as the election of Donald Trump demonstrated.
When progressives speak of the liberal elite, we are talking about those with the economic, social, and political position that allows them to be more equal than the grass roots voters. There is no better example of liberal elites than the super delegates that decide our presidential primaries. Another example from 2016 was, obviously, the DNC. Liberals tend to believe what the elites say, and that what they do is for the common good. Progressives tend to think of the James Baldwin quote, I can't believe what you say, because I see what you do.
Consider, for example, the issues involved in fund-raising. Few members of the Democratic Party speak in favor of the Citizens United decision. Without question, corporate money has an unhealthy influence on democracy. It is safe to say that the liberal elite in DC listens closer to the corporations that donate thousands to their candidate and Super PACs, than to the individual who donates $10 or $20. And that is not just in the general elections it holds just as true in the primary season. So as uncomfortable as it may be, we have the obligation to ask: if corporate money has an undemocratic influence on general elections, should it be allowed to determine the outcome of primaries?
Any politician can talk about protecting the environment. Donald Trump says he is protecting the environment, while doing virtually everything possible to advocate for the financial interests of the corporations that are destroying the natural world. We can't believe what he says, because we see what he is doing not that any rational person ever believed him to begin with.
There are liberal elites who speak passionately about the environment. And, to be fair, some of them advocate for environmental issues with their actions. Yet there are many others who merely talk the talk, and fail to walk the walk. Some even express contempt for environmentalist when they are behind closed doors. This is not mere speculation, nor is it a paranoid conspiracy theory. In 2016, documents made public proved this beyond question. More, we saw what politicians supported the people in Standing Rock. We know who was there.
We are at a point where the grass roots progressive community is saying no to those who mistakenly believe they have the authority to dictate the rules they seek to enforce on others, but are unwilling to follow themselves. If we examine this within the context of the Democratic Party, that translates to people refusing to be an unconscious cog in a corporate machine. Some people understand that; others simply do not.
It includes the reality that Bernie Sanders is not merely a leader in the Democratic Party, but he is a member of the party. Bernie is as much a member of the party today as I am. And I am every bit as much a member of the Democratic Party, with an equal right to my opinions, beliefs, and values, as any other forum member. I recognize that I am not in any position that could be mistaken for elite. I'm proud to be an average member of the grass roots, at the lowest level of stratification.
My focus is empowering the grass roots within the Democratic Party. I accept the fact that I will never be invited to a fancy DC cocktail party, to bump shoulders with those beautiful people Lennon sang about in Baby, You're a Rich Man. I'm not at risk of either getting or accepting such an invitation.
I will, however, continue to attend rallies and demonstrations; speak to groups, including college students and environmentalist; and assist regional Democratic Party committees, send $10 or $20 to the individual candidates I trust, and invest my time and energy in their campaigns. I'm confident that this allows me to work within a large segment of our party. I am at peace with the reality that there are others who do not agree with me as an individual, and who do not support the issues that are most important to me. They have the same right to their opinions as I have to mine; more, they own their actions, just as I own mine.
Peace,
H2O Man