The "far left" is actually the progressive majority in America

[TheMachineWins]

Here's what the majority of Americans want: Universal healthcare, an end to the wars, pro-choice, equal rights for all, an end to illegal wiretapping, torturers held accountable.

The "far left" bullshit posted around here is just that: BULLSHIT.

[NRaleighLiberal]

1. Problem - media and much of the $$$ resides on the far right. NT

[geckosfeet]

2. The "far left" in the US of A is embarassingly middle of the road in Europe.

[Joe the Liberal]

14. Exactly. n/t

[Vidar]

97. Why Europe is a much nicer place than the US & Latin America is gaining quickly.

[FarLeftRage]

3. That's odd...

Because I am "Far Left", and these are my goals:

1.The reorganization of economic life on the basis of social need and the common good.

2.The elimination of poverty and oppression.

3.The elevation of the living standards of the nation’s people on the basis of social equality.

4.Create the fullest extension of democratic control over the policies and priorities of society and the processes by which wealth is produced and distributed.

Maybe after this is fully achieved, then we can have universal healthcare, an end to the wars, pro-choice, equal rights for all, an end to illegal wiretapping, torturers held accountable.

And none of this is "bullshit"...

[scarletwoman]

4. I think you're misinterpreting the OP. It's the ATTACKS on the left that are bullshit.

Anyway, I'm with you.

sw

[FarLeftRage]

5. Thanks...

I know it's the attacks by the corpoRATe media and the reich-wing in general.

[grantcart]

6. Depends on your point of view. There is a far left here that wants to completely end

the capital system. They would view your definition of 'the far left' as bourgeois nonsense.

[depakid]

19. What you'd talking about there is fringe

[napoleon_in_rags]

69. That's not true. Capitalism is not sacrosanct.

If you are running around with your head in the middle of the last century, being concerned about being labeled "red" or "socialist" by McCarthy, then maybe its sacrosanct. But for those of us living in the first decade of the 21st century, we've seen a near total collapse of our financial system due to unregulated capitalism that called for one of the largest government funded social programs in history, the banking bailout, to prevent a total collapse of our system. Unregulated capitalism is ALREADY an idea discarded into the dustbin of history, not because a popular "leftist" effort on the part of constantly watched workers, but because of the advocates or unregulated capitalism itself.

[defendandprotect]

76. Unregulated caitalism is merely organized crime ---

and we've practied that crime not only everywhere around the world --

but at home, as well -- many times!

[eridani]

21. None of them are politically active in the sense of working to elect candidates, though

They are still waiting for the revolution to happen in the streets.

[Just Visiting]

49. Which is to their benefit

They learned long ago that it matters little which Repubocrat gets "selected" for their voting pleasure.

On the contrary, the far left is politically active in ways far beyond what the party loyalist is.

The progressive wants real change and understands the only way to achieve is to build toward viable alternatives.

The two-party zealots merely want their respective team to "win."

Which of course means we all lose.

[rapturedbyrobots]

50. not in the streets

its true that many 'leftists' if you can really call us that anymore. i think what you really mean is progressive radicals. anyway, we have for the most part given up on the idea of electoral politics as the PRIMARY solution to social problems. instead of relying on elected politicians to represent our interests, which they do not, we aren't 'waiting' for the revolution in the streets but making the revolution in our homes, backyards, and neighborhoods. we're producing our own food, learning to provide for our own health, building community structures that employ true PARTICIPATORY democracy to address our collective local and regional needs. you should try it. it requires more effort than working for a political campaign every election cycle, but the results last longer and are directly accessible.

[eridani]

94. It still makes a difference who holds office, though.

I don't expect bold initiatives from Dems, but the small items they take on have real benefits for real people.

[rapturedbyrobots]

95. i agree

that's why many are willing to play both games and vote strategically, but still don't RELY on electoral politics for creating change.

[defendandprotect]

77. The revolution of the 1960's was also, of course, anti-capitalist . . .

[creeksneakers2]

84. They are very active though in trying to take away as many

votes as possible from the rest of the left wing effort. Their most important objective is to make Democrats lose.

[truedelphi]

54. Uh the "capital" system is pretty much ended. Instead we are going back to feudalism

We now have a situation in Which the princes and nobility of society are saved from their gambling excesses because the Powers that be pretend our society is being held hostage (and will become extinct!) unless we bail them out.

The Consitution does not provide instruction on whether or not our nation is run according to Capitalistic or Socialistic methods. But there is a clause in the Constitution that clearly states that there should be no establishment of a nobility. In setting up the perpetual BailOuts, so that the Main Street Worker who cannot get a loan must now bail out the Wall Street investment dealer, allowing him or her to keep their Masserati, we have indeed created a nobility.

[Mosaic]

67. Excellent Point

They should not be allowed to get away with the enormous bailout to the upper class. That kind of outrage is the stuff revolutions are made of.

[krabigirl]

66. Nonsense. This "far lefty" would like to see our country become a social democracy.

Somewhat like France or Denmark. Unfortunately, we are too big. But we DO need more protection for the working class and we need national health care.

[defendandprotect]

75. What makes capitalism anything but far right . . . .???

Are you trying to suggest that capitalism and democracy are synonymous???

If anything capitalism is anti-economic democracy and therefore antonymous.

Capitalism is a ridiculous "King-of-the-Hill" system intended to move
the wealth and resources of a nation from the many to the few.

In order to have democracy we require economic democracy -- that would be
democratic socialism.

[boppers]

7. Perhaps you're defining centrist as "far left".

The "far left" I've seen represented on DU, variously wants to abolish corporations, wants extremely high (90%) tax rates on the rich, wants to imprison all military who voluntarily fought in Iraq/Afghanistan, wants to eliminate private media (see corporations), wants to bankrupt companies that harvest lumber, want to ban all science that requires animal testing, wants to tax churches as for-profit business, wants to see the US government prosecuted for 9/11, wants to heavily tax (or otherwise eliminate) all animal-based foods, wants to legalize all soft drugs, wants to criminalize circumcision, wants to eliminate US intelligence agencies entirely, wants to eliminate the US military entirely, wants to make personal firearms illegal, wants to end all use of fossil fuels, wants to eliminated both nuclear weapons and nuclear power generation, wants to eliminate large-scale agriculture, wants to eliminate standardized education, wants to standardize education, wants free mental health care, wants to abolish mental health, wants free vaccines, wants to eliminate vaccines... lots of positions are represented at DU.

Suffice to say that the "far left" is what americans (and the democratic party and progressives) *don't* agree on. Oh, and "an end to the wars" isn't universal, there's some dissent from the center about Afghanistan, along with what "equal rights for all" could, and should, mean, WRT undocumented workers, convicted sex criminals, and other "margin" cases.

[Chulanowa]

8. And where exactly have you seen this?

And what makes you think it's indicative of the left, anyway?

Oh, now I remember. This is what the right tells you the left is about, and if the right were wrong, they wouldn't be called "the right"...

[boppers]

12. Well, I listed out quite a few things...

..and I didn't say it was "indicative of the left" (without the qualifier of "far").

As far as where I've seen these opinions, they've been individually represented by various individuals on DU, Pacifica, AAR, Indymedia, DailKos, HuffPo, MoveOn, and a fairly large number of varying advocacy groups.

Was there a specific opinion/position you'd like more information or sourcing on?

[Bjorn Against]

18. There are many things on that list which I have a hard time believing that anyone actually said

I have seen the "far left" attacked for positions they never took many times, and there are several things on that list that I have a hard time believing that you could find sources for. While there is much I find questionable on that list I will only ask for two links so just show me...

1. Who on the left wants to imprison all military who voluntarily fought in Iraq/Afghanistan?

2. Who on the left wants to eliminate private media?

[boppers]

26. Huh, different people have different perspectives, I guess.

1. This philosophy was highly active during VietNam (it's a militant-pro-pacifism stance), basically, the political position is that voluntary military action in unjust wars is complicit participation in war crimes. Check out various NION/RCP,USA/WCW/ANSWER/IVAW materials, or more specifically, the opinions expressed about Watada and Funk... for some jumping off points, see http://www.brusselstribunal.org/Watada.htm You could rightly accuse me of synthesis, for assuming that passive participation in a war crime would result in imprisonment, but see the daily calls around here for Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld/Rice/Rove prosecutions.

2. Really? RCP,USA, for one, along with the Bolivarans, and other central-state leftists. The philosophy is that private enterprise can't be trusted, with media as a prime target. This is an old socialist, and communist, ideal. '"Castro-ating" the Media' (an amusing title) offers an interesting perspective, done via "consolidation', which doesn't eliminate private investment, but creates powerful editorial control (similar to the Chinese media system). See http://www.google.com/search?q=media+under+communism

All that being said, maybe you don't consider consider the Communist Party, USA, to be part of the far left, or ANSWER to be part of the far left, or (whoever), and that's certainly reasonable. It's similar to the "broad brush" attack used when the KKK, or Christian Identity, or the GOP is linked to the Republican Party (okay, the last one is a joke).

[Bjorn Against]

31. A couple problems with these links...

The first link does not say anything about all volunteer soldiers in the wars on Iraq and Afghanistan being imprisoned. Calling for the prosecutions of Bush and his top people is not anything like calling for the prosecutions of all soldiers who have fought in Iraq and Afghanistan. None of the groups you mentioned have called for imprisonment of all soldiers that I am aware of, and to even suggest a group like IVAW would hold such a position is absurd. IVAW stands for Iraq Veterans Against the War, if they were to take such a position that would mean they were calling for their own imprisonment which is something they have clearly not done.

The second link is simply a Google search on Communism and mainly relates to China and other totalitarian states. The sources you said you have heard this from are "DU, Pacifica, AAR, Indymedia, DailKos, HuffPo, MoveOn, and a fairly large number of varying advocacy groups." I suppose you could use the "varying advocacy groups" as your out, but the position of eliminating all private media is virtually unheard of in the United States and I certainly haven't heard that position from any of the sources you listed in your earlier posts. In fact interestingly enough all of the specific groups you mentioned earlier produce private media and for most of them that role as a media outlet is the entire purpose of their organization.

[boppers]

35. You are correct.

IVAW is interesting, in that several members offer examples of having personally committed war crimes, but do not advocate that they should be held personally responsible for their actions. I looked for a better example of the "soldiers=criminals" (formerly known as babykillers) meme, but didn't find a whole lot, aside from the occasional outlandish sign. Its certainly a minority view, and you are welcome to state that this is evidence that this view is rare now. Since I only have personal, anecdotal, experience with this, I'll happily say that this is an extreme viewpoint. Far Left, if you will.

WRT to your second point, I agree that this varies by state/nation, but when I think of "the left", I tend to think in varying local, regional, and global scopes. DU, for example, is global, and we have have Chavez supporters, Che supporters, etc. here. Most of what I've heard in the US that pertains to state media control (which is not the same as abolition) where private editorial control is affected by the "fairness doctrine".

Taking a step back again, to address "what the Far Left" believes, vs. "what the US far left" believes, and personal exposure to various extremes, there's a variety of opinions. The Far Left under Chavez is different from the Far Left under Obama.

[BolivarianHero]

41. What's a Bolivaran?

Is it like a moran?

The correct word is Bolivarian, and if you would care to do some research about Venezuela (rather than listening to Pelosi and Rnagel bash Chavez for telling the truth about Dim Son), you would know that there are 10 private daily newspapers in Venezuela and they have been allowed to publish without interference since Chavez's election even though 9 of then oppose his government. Furthermore, the only media outlet that was "banned" (in actuality, it can still broadcast on cable and satellite) has thousands of regulatory violations that predate Chavez's 1998 election and was implicated in a CIA-backed media coup against his government. Are you one of those "liberals" who thought it was funny for the U.S., China, and Europe to arm and fund the Mujahideen while it was raping and pillaging Afghanistan and wantonly killing progressives, feminists, and intellectuals?

Listening to self-styled "moderates" talk about the Latin American left is like listening to Dobson talk about parenting or Ham talk about that bullshit he calls science.

[creeksneakers2]

70. I've never seen any of them want troops imprisoned

But they had a thread once about whether they desired to see US troops in Iraq killed by the enemy and they almost all said that was a good thing.

I've never seen them say they want to eliminate private media. They say they want to eliminate "oorporate" media.

[brentspeak]

9. Somehow, you failed to notice that people have been advocating a 90% MARGINAL tax rate

You know, like in the tradition of that great far leftist...Dwight D. Eisenhower???

[boppers]

15. A 90% Marginal tax rate can be left, far left, centrist, or even to the right.

A given issue is not what defines a position on the continuum, rather, that issue, when taken in current context, is what defines where it falls on the current spectrum.

I tried to illustrate that with some inherent contradictions in my list, but as a further example, lets take the death penalty: Right now, total abolition of the death penalty may be considered a "left", or "far left", position, and yet, at various times (and in various contexts), the death penalty was actually considered a sanctioned form of punishment for the rich by the left, with public beheadings of the rich and powerful in France, and numerous purges (to use it the term euphemistically) by socialist and communist-leaning governments throughout the 20th century.

[Dragonfli]

65. Wow! You are just so full of shit that you had to concentrate it just to keep it all in your orbit.

I have been reading and posting here for only five years now, but I must admit you deserve some sort of prize!

How the hell do you do it without all the methane exploding?

This should be fun to watch

:popcorn:


BTW I have only ever pulled out the popcorn one other time and think this will be much better (PSST this isn't a yahoo board there are many very well educated liberals here)

[MasonJar]

80. You are now categorizing the French Revolution as a far left movement?

The French Revolution was not a leftest political movement; it was a desperation attack by impoverished, abused, unlanded and hungry French peasants against a totalitarian government, which later degenerated into a debacle worse than the poor had suffered. Anyone became fodder for their revenge before it was over. Several of the leaders were Robespierrean...i.e. cruel to the max. Your problem is that you are desperately trying to tie your so-called far left with any historical and cultural group which has or is attacking from an anti-fascist point of view. Fascism is one extreme; you are relegating all far left to the other extreme. Chavez has been revitalizing his country for all the people, not just the rich. That is something which is very scary to Washington, so he has to be trashed at every oppotunity. You have been reading/listening to/watching the MSM, which is corporatist.

[Uzybone]

11. Well said

the self defined "far left" is nowhere close to the progressive majority.

[tomp]

38. ***DU RECORD FOR NUMBER OF STRAW MEN IN ONE POST!***

Unlikely to ever be surpassed. Congratulations!!!

[Sebastian Doyle]

55. Let's see if we can take a few bristles out of this broad brush

The "far left" I've seen represented on DU, variously wants to abolish corporations, wants extremely high (90%) tax rates on the rich...

Worked for Eisenhower. Why the Hell not? But first, we have to eliminate all the loopholes.

....wants to imprison all military who voluntarily fought in Iraq/Afghanistan...

Nope. Just want them the fuck OUT of Iraq and Afghanistan.

....wants to eliminate private media (see corporations)

Eliminate them, no. Regulate them (i.e. before 1996) yes.

wants to bankrupt companies that harvest lumber

They did that to themselves by overharvesting.

want to ban all science that requires animal testing

Test it on Republicans instead :evilgrin:

wants to tax churches as for-profit business

If a "church" exists primarily to promote right wing politics, or make money, then yes. Such an entity would be more a corporation than a church. Jesus didn't live in a mansion, and neither should those claiming to represent Him.

wants to see the US government prosecuted for 9/11

The US government, no. The Bush Crime Family, yes. As the creators of Al Qaeda (whatever they actually are) they are ultimately responsible for 9/11, regardless of what story you believe. (And if you believe the one they told you, you're already hopeless)

wants to heavily tax (or otherwise eliminate) all animal-based foods

Never entered my mind. I'm not a vegan by any means, but I wouldn't argue that people should eat less meat. However, that's completely a voluntary decision, and should never be otherwise.

wants to legalize all soft drugs, wants to criminalize circumcision

Circumcision??? Perhaps you have been using some "soft drugs" yourself this morning? ;)
For the record, I would legalize ALL drugs, even the hard ones. And then treat addiction as a health issue, not a criminal issue. At the very least, we need to legalize the cannabis plant, in ALL of its forms, immediately.

wants to eliminate US intelligence agencies entirely

The CIA has been part of the Bush Crime Family since day one. They have done NOTHING positive for this country or any other. I don't especially have a problem with the others, but they aren't exempt from corruption (i.e. J. Edna Hoover, for example)

wants to eliminate the US military entirely

Nope. But I would like to see them used ONLY to defend the United States of America.

wants to make personal firearms illegal

If you are a sane, law abiding adult, and can pass the background check, I have no problem with you owning a reasonable number of firearms.

wants to end all use of fossil fuels

What other 19th century technologies are you using on a daily basis? We can do better, and should be.

wants to eliminated both nuclear weapons and nuclear power generation

Hell yes. Can you make a reasonable argument why we shouldn't?

wants to eliminate large-scale agriculture

If you mean FrankenFood subsidized factory farms, yes.

wants to eliminate standardized education, wants to standardize education, wants free mental health care, wants to abolish mental health, wants free vaccines, wants to eliminate vaccines... lots of positions are represented at DU.

Now you're just contradicting yourself ;)

[frylock]

59. stop listening to the far right..

your list is fucking garbage. you know where you can shove it.

[The Hope Mobile]

64. Which DU are you reading? Apparently I'm missing that kind of extremism. nt

[MasonJar]

73. That is absurd. Give us some links. I am on DU almost every day and I

have seen none of this.

[defendandprotect]

78. What would be wrong with returning to the tax rates of the Eisehower years???

Corporations are a creature of capitalism -- and original restrictions on them should
be reinstated. They should serve the needs of the public and/or government -- that's all.

Are you saying that you have a respect for or see some value in our corporate press?

Wake up to Global Warming and start thinking . . . not of "lumber" but of TREES!!!

Certainly churches should be taxed on their incomes, stock portfolios, real estate holdings --
only the church and its surrounding property and soup kitchens should be tax-exempt.

And, presumably you also believe in the "Drug War" . . . wow!

No one wants to make all firearms illegal -- America wants gun control.

Our Founders were against any standing army!

Looks like you have a long list of fears --- try discussing them here!

[Political Tiger]

10. The "far left" also wants Dennis Kucinich as Prez and Johnathan Turely on the Supreme Court

...and that's never gonna happen.

The items you list as what the "far left" wants is also the same thing us regular "lefties" want. Perhaps the biggest difference between the "far left" and the rest of the left is the "far left" lives in a fantasy world where Dennis Kucinich is president and he waves a magic wand and all of America falls into place, wars magically end and single-payer suddenly becomes law of the land while the rest of us live in the real world where things like universal heath care and the end to wars doesn't happen overnight nor is it easy.

[Atticus]

16. Dennis may, indeed, never be seriously considered as a presidential candidate,

but I think that says more about us than him. If he, and others like him, don't keep reminding us what should be, what we should aspire to, we will find ourselves setting the bar lower and lower. There will, hopefully, always be a place in liberal politics for the "cockeyed optimists" who choose to "look at what might be and ask why not".

I find myself getting more idealistic as I get older, and I'm OLD!

[cascadiance]

22. I think that Dennis and so-called "far left" people help us in many respects...

... even if they aren't necessarily going to be elected president or have their policies govern this country.

It is the presence of a STRONGLY empowered and VOCAL far left, that is given voice to be heard by the American people, that also empowers "the left" to be the position of "compromise" that can lead us to significant and needed change.

Many people don't remember that FDR was in effect challenged by such a strong "far left" during his administration, that let him "compromise" on a New Deal, when a strong "far left" threatened as much as revolution during his time. Had that "far left" not been in place, one wonders how far he would have been pushed to go with the New Deal, and whether it would have ever been structured well enough to get us out of the morass of the depression we were coming out of at the time.

That is why we need to find ways to have people hear the far left, even if we don't necessarily want to embrace their policies of doing things like "ending capitalism", etc.

I myself have been called "far left", but even I don't go so far as to offer amnesty to all illegal immigrants here, or open our borders in that respect, not because I don't want immigrants, but because the way its being done isn't sustainable, and only serves to lower the cost of labor everywhere. There are many other solutions that need to be looked at to help labor be empowered locally around the world wherever they are so that they don't have to move someplace else to make a living, and those living in higher cost of living areas don't have to feel threatened by cheaper labor elsewhere.

Not every issue breaks down to a dichotomy of "right" vs. "left" either. I think in many cases that is manufactured by the corporate infrastructure of our country to distract us on emotional issues that don't affect them, so that we won't look at universal issues where they steal from 90% of Americans that could be more of a populist vs. corporatist dichotomy (aka 80-95% of America vs. the elite minority at the top) in terms of potential numbers. Those issues we should try to frame as such and not as "right" vs. "left" issues to help open up a bigger tent for others to come in to the party. As long as we have the DLC and Blue Dog types though trying to avoid this, this will be difficult to do. And in fact that serves just drive away those that might want to come in on these populist vs. corporatist issues, feeling that the DLC represents a majority of the mind set of Democrats that wants to screw them in ways that only the corporate segment of the Democrats want to do so. That's the foundation I think of those so-called "tea baggers" too. If the arguments were framed better, some of the less racist, but perhaps less intellectually challenged parts of that movement might be more attracted to Democrats then.

[NorthCarolina]

71. Well said n/t

[frylock]

60. links for turley on the SC?

take your time. i'd love to see you pull those from out your ass.

[defendandprotect]

79. What nonsense . . .I'm for Turley on the Supreme Court . . .

and many have mentioned him as an excellent choice for the SC . . . many times

here at DU.

[zulchzulu]

13. "Far Left" is what I think. "Centrist Moderate" is what I know will happen.

The realities and complexities of politics and the layers of efforts that make legislation actually happen perhaps are "Actual Realist".

[JamesA1102]

17. OK here's what the polls say.

"Here's what the majority of Americans want:"

Universal healthcare

According to the April CBS Times poll it's a yes; http://www.pollingreport.com/health.htm

an end to the wars

Iraq, yes: http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm

Afghanistan, spilt: http://www.pollingreport.com/afghan.htm

pro-choice

Results are a bit contradictary depending on poll and question but seems to be leaning yes: http://www.pollingreport.com/abortion.htm

equal rights for all

Depends on the issue: http://www.pollingreport.com/civil.htm http://www.pollingreport.com/civil2.htm

an end to illegal wiretapping

Oddly no recent polls on this.

torturers held accountable

Unfortunately no: http://www.pollingreport.com/terror.htm

[depakid]

23. Here' s much more accurate and more credible data and analysis:

Progressive Majority- Why Conservative America is a Myth

http://cloudfront.mediamatters.org/static/pdf/progressive_majority.pdf

Trends in Political Values and Core Attitudes: 1987-2007

http://people-press.org/report/?reportid=312

Alternet summary: http://www.alternet.org/media/54914

[JamesA1102]

24. Those are great resources. Thanks! nt

[depakid]

25. Impressive stuff, eh?

Very little reliance on cheap media polls- but BIG conclusions drawn from valid and reliable data.

[mkultra]

46. Trends are great but we still have numbers to overcome before we are the majority

Although things are moving in our direction, the middle can flee from us just as it did from the republicans. Dont think because we have the floor that we also have a Bush Mandate.

[bvar22]

20. Hey...I"m a CENTRIST !

The Democratic Party Leadership is well to the Right of the MAJORITY of Americans.

Here is what the MAJORITY of Americans (Democrats AND Republicans) want from OUR government!

In recent polls by the Pew Research Group, the Opinion Research Corporation, the Wall Street Journal, and CBS News, the American majority has made clear how it feels. Look at how the majority feels about some of the issues that you'd think would be gospel to a real Democratic Party:

1. 65 percent (of ALL Americans, Democrats AND Republicans) say the government should guarantee health insurance for everyone -- even if it means raising taxes.

2. 86 percent favor raising the minimum wage (including 79 percent of selfdescribed "social conservatives").

3. 60 percent favor repealing either all of Bush's tax cuts or at least those cuts that went to the rich.

4. 66 percent would reduce the deficit not by cutting domestic spending but by reducing Pentagon spending or raising taxes.

5. 77 percent believe the country should do "whatever it takes" to protect the environment.

6. 87 percent think big oil corporations are gouging consumers, and 80 percent (including 76 percent of Republicans) would support a windfall profits tax on the oil giants if the revenues went for more research on alternative fuels.

7. 69 percent agree that corporate offshoring of jobs is bad for the U.S. economy (78 percent of "disaffected" voters think this), and only 22% believe offshoring is good because "it keeps costs down."

http://alternet.org/story/29788/

8. Over 63% oppose the War on the Iraqi People.

9. 92% of ALL Americans support TRANSPARENT, VERIFIABLE elections!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x446445

The above polls were taken in 2005.
The numbers would be even more remarkable if taken today.





The Democratic Party is a BIG TENT, but there is NO ROOM for those
who advance the agenda of THE RICH (Corporate Owners) at the EXPENSE of LABOR and the POOR.

[Jennicut]

27. The polls and reality are different. People say they want these things

and then cave in later when the hard questions come up about how to really do all these things. Many Americans are babyish in my opinion, they want things without putting in the sacrifice or hard work involved.

[BzaDem]

29. And for some of the issues the OP mentions, people don't even say they want the things

even without the hard questions.

[Name removed]

28. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[TheMachineWins]

32. I find it very odd that posts such as yours remain in a moderated forum:

Here are a few links for your education. In the future, I suggest you not be so rude as you lose all credibility when acting that way.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/01/22/torture/

http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/02/poll-majority-want-investigations-warrantless-wire

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/04/06/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry4923731.shtml

http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm

http://pewforum.org/docs/?DocID=350

[Name removed]

36. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[anonymous171]

30. To end all of the wars you will have to remove corporate influence from our government.

We need to smash our economic royalty. Until we do that, there will be no peace.

[leftstreet]

33. Most of my 'conservative' friends and acquaintances are 'far left'

They want exactly what you're talking about.

And the politicians KNOW this.

How long can they keep us down?

:shrug:

K&R!

[IndianaGreen]

34. The 8-hour workday was a "far left" idea

I wonder how many even know where May Day originated at.

[Radical Activist]

37. "far" left is not a term I'd encourage people to use.

Conservatives are trying hard enough to marginalize the left without Democrats pitching in to help.

I'd like to use the historical meaning of "progressive" which was a catch all term for everything from left of center liberals to socialists. But the term was co-opted for other meanings.

[Name removed]

39. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[quickesst]

40. Your description fits .....

...what a Democrat is. I'm center-left, and I agree with all the things on your list, and more. The only real difference, with few exceptions, between a Democrat, and someone who is "far left" is patience, or a lack thereof. Wanting it all, and wanting it all right now describes the far left to me. Having the patience for tactful change, and realizing it won't come today, or tomorrow describes a logical, common sense Democrat. It's that simple. Screaming vs logic. Thanks.
quickesst

[noiretextatique]

68. why should you be "patient?"

tactful change...what exactly is that? what's wrong with wanting a government that actually works for the majority of citizens right now? i will never believe that accepting diminished expectations is a moderate or rational position.

[Orsino]

42. But do we really, REALLY want an end to the wars?

Will an American majority really be willing to accept withdrawal from our shadow wars without the achievement of some clear, if necessarily arbitrary, victory condition? Would we be able to withstand the right-wing propaganda labeling this as defeat, or as a Democratic loss of nerve when victory was sooooo close?

I don't think so--or Obama would already be drawing down. No, we love militarism too much just to let it go. x(

The same goes for the other issues you've listed. Most Americans might be inclined progressively, if allowed to think, but the MSM won't let them think. We are too easily led to resist when the television tells us how real Amurkans stand. Corporate framing will be too much for us, I'm afraid.

[ShortnFiery]

45. "No, we love militarism too much just to let it go."

No we don't but we've been sold a bill of goods by the M$M and Hollywood.

War is TERRORISM. Plain and simple ... we will draw down in the near future because there are only so many times soldiers can be sent over to the M.E. to "kill and die" before it DEADENS THE SOUL and ROTS THE BRAIN.

The fallout will be breathtaking ... it's coming and may we adapt and help those tortured from PTSD ... otherwise, they're (and we're) LOST. :(

[JAbuchan08]

52. I think you are right, people are "against war," and "against torture"

but they are willing to make exceptions if the media can convince them of an "exceptional situation" like with the Iraq war - most people polled against the Iraq invasion (without a UN mandate) until the media and the Bush administration managed to massage public opinion on the subject.

In other words most Americans have high ideals, but they will make very large exceptions to those ideals under the pressure of people who say they are not practical in the "real-world"

[ecstatic]

43. Those things you mentioned are not far left ideals

and certainly not the group referred to when people on DU discuss the "far left."

[ShortnFiery]

44. But that's the point: Those mainstream values are what the GOP terms "far left."

The GOP runs the M$M new cycles - of the foregoing, I have no doubt. :(

[livefreest]

47. agreed

[RoccoR5955]

48. There is no "far left" in this country any more...

Do you hear, in any of the media, for anyone WANTING socialism as an alternative to capitalism?
Do you hear, in any of the media, a call for the end of American Imperialism?
Do you hear, in any of the media, an end to the corporations?
NO!

Until you hear at least these things, than I rest my case, there is no "far left."

[Buzz Clik]

89. Ok. The mainstream media are not far left.

I don't understand. That isn't what the OP was all about.

[JAbuchan08]

51. Basically the difference between "mocerate/centrists Dems" (or those who see themselves as such)

and left-liberals is not that moderates don't believe in those things that you've listed, but that they are afraid to TRULY fight for them because they don't want to be cast as "far left.

I don't want to sound too flippant, because there is definitely a point at which pushing too hard on certain issues is going to backfire, but I really believe that the major difference between the "far-left" and "moderates" is, for the most part, tactical and not ideologica. Moderates are (more or less) afraid to step out of their comfort zone to push for those things that they know that America needs, and which most Americans agree with, because they worry they'll lose the framing game or they'll be branded as "far-left."

The Iraq war is a good example. I opposed (and oppose) the Iraq war not because I am a far left pacifist, but because I am a moderate who believes in transparent government, yet I felt that I was pushed into the "far-left" camp for my politics. I hold what I think are fairly moderate positions on most issues, and because these positions are moderate and reasonable I don't think that it makes sense to compromise further, because I don't see why practicality and reason should compromise with reactionary fundamentalism.

[truedelphi]

53. Exactly. The "Far Left" is a creation of the Powers that Be -

The same people that tell us how miserable everyone is in countries where health insurance is a given.

[mod mom]

56. Another RW label used to confuse the populace. rec'd There's some DUers who follow

these talking points as well (ie the corporatist apologists)

We won OVERWHELMINGLY, and they just don't want to face it.

[MadBadger]

57. The Majority of Americans dont want equal rights for all or toturers to be held accountable

The Majority of Americans are anti Gay Marriage, and they are pro-torture because they have bought into fear.

[AlbertCat]

72. The Majority of Americans dont want equal rights for all or toturers to be held accountable

Really? Your proof of that please.

[MadBadger]

91. Here are some polls

54% are against gay marriage according to a May CNN national Poll

http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/05/04/samesex.marriage.poll/

55% opposed, 37% for, according to an April Quinnipiac Poll

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1295.xml?ReleaseID=1292


According to a late April Poll, 46 perecent are fine with Waterboarding, though 71% think it is torture, while 37% are not cool with it.

62% say that Congress should not have hearings on the Administrations torture policies, 34% think we should

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/04/27/opinion/polls/main4972844.shtml

[depakid]

98. Cheap media polls are for suckers

Americans eat 'em up though- and recite 'em as though they were Gospel.

[MessiahRp]

58. Thank you!

I've been saying this for years...

The corporate media will never let anyone believe it but it's totally true.

Rp

[cyclezealot]

61. I hate having to categorize anything as 'far.'

It says little. Of course the far right , is far right. But, define them as to issues. They played the game as painting us as far left. Issues first. Lazy people tend to let those who categorize anyone as out of the mainstream. Don' let them do it.. When the American people find out what the left is about, they'll realize we were in the mainstream of ideas. Not far left at all. Reagan used his bully pulpit to categorize us . We should have never let him get away with his labeling us what we arent. .

[MasonJar]

62. Here! Here! I am sick of being labeled "far left" by dems when I just

want what's best for the future of America and my grandchild. #1 It is unConstitutional to hold prisoners without charge and trial. Obama clearly understands this. He is after all a Constitutional expert.(Please note that aside from being morally and Constitutionally the proper course, the refusal to try prisoners fairly in a court of law could also impact any of us and our families in the future if someone with fascist leanings becomes president. Dick Cheney, anyone?) #2 It is against the Geneva Conventions and other treaties that the USA has signed into law not to prosecute war crimes perpetrated by American citizens (Put in names like Bush and Cheney.) #3 Single payer is the only sensible solution to the healthcare dilemma in America (see Bill Moyers/May 22 show) and Obama knows this. He is shown saying so on the Moyers show. ( Please note: I am not down on Obama. He is a very intelligent and thoughtful person, who is surrounded by people like Geithner/Summer and Rahm Emmanue, whom he chose, but who it turns out are too entrenched with the corporations.) I admit that until I saw Moyers' show last Friday, I too thought a public option as feasible; please watch the show if you haven't, especially the interview session in the second half. It will make a believer of you, I promise. #4 The banks and brokerage houses have been bailed out, but where are the regulations promised to ensure the culprits do not once again wheel and deal themselves and the taxpayer into bankrupcy and where is the money for homeowners in foreclosure? #5 As a retired teacher, I dislike the only proposal I have heard about in education: merit pay. #6 And on the environment, one of Salazar's first acts was to remove the wolf from the endangered list, an absurd and vicious and unnecessary move,which even the worst environmental president in history, GWB, did NOT do. Now tell me which of these complaints nails me as far left, rather than a citizen concerned with doing what is right in a progressive manner?

[creeksneakers2]

87. I'm not sure

The US has never given trials to POWs that I know of. The Constitution does not prohibit keeping prisoners of war. So not every prisoner is entitled to a trial.

The problem is that terrorists don't neatly fit into POW status. They generally aren't engaged in active battle when captured. There is no end to the war coming when we could release them.

But they don't really fit into criminal status either. 9/11 was more than a crime, it was an act of war. A plot to commit mass murder in the future to terrify the population into accepting some political outcome the terrorists desire is an act of war.

Since its not that clear, I don't consider somebody who thinks trials for all are appropriate to be far left. What I do see as unreasonable is when someone refuses to acknowledge that there are complexities to the issue.

[The Hope Mobile]

63. This is something I say often. K & R! nt

[leftofthedial]

74. yup.

there's a concerted DLC, right-wing corporatist movement relentlessly reframing the center as the "far left."

[Enthusiast]

81. I want to reinvigorate

our national economy by focusing on green energy sources to the MAX. I must be a horrible far leftist. :hi:

[earcandle]

82. Right on! and those who protest the progressive

majority can just GET OUT!  Why, because you are a bunch of
heartless blanks.  

Don't know where you stand?
Have a listen.  Music helps one find one's way.

http://www.earcandleproductions.com/Get_Out.mp3

Cut and paste if that link doesn't work.  
And use headphones, lots of American voices in this one. 

[creeksneakers2]

83. I've used the term "far left"

I didn't think that was bad. I identify myself as left or moderate. I don't know what else to call the people who follow a certain set of beliefs.

I've switched to calling them "progressives" with the quotation marks. It is polite to call a group what they call themselves. But the word "progressive" fits lots of people who I am not talking about. So I use the quotation marks.

You've cited mostly mainstream positions that are shared by both the left and moderates. But people here aren't being called "far left" here for supporting those positions. They are being called far left for things like saying Obama is in corporate pockets and should be punished by letting Republicans win the next election. Does a majority believe that?

There's a good debate going on between people who want to advocate single payer and those who think it would be better to compromise for a public option. Both positions are within the mainstream. Its not within the mainstream to advocate having no improvements in health care because single payer advocates weren't recognized at a Congressional hearing. I've also read many comments that are something like, "I won't accept a system that allows insurance companies to make profits off health care." The way these people talk, I conclude they are more concerned with eliminating insurance companies than helping the millions of Americans who go without health care. That's not a majority position.

When I present reasoned arguments for a moderate positions I'm called "DLC" and worse. Not that I care, but the majority of the public doesn't think that because somebody holds a moderate position they are a paid undercover agent of the DLC. Most people don't even know what the DLC is and I don't see them as having much influence anymore. "Progressives" think every Democrat in Congress but a few are completely under corporate control and therefore all Democrats should be removed and a new third party should be formed. Plenty of folks want Democrats out of office, but its almost always because they are too liberal, not too conservative.

The thing that makes me most angry and makes me use the term "far left" is the belief that symbols are more important than outcomes. For example, many here were willing to lose the 2008 election to run a failed impeachment attempt. What about the war in Iraq or health care or any of the other things? A loss in 2008 would have meant none of those things would get attention. The far left was willing to sacrifice that for a symbolic impeachment crusade.

I constantly see sanctimonious claims that "progressives" are the ones who really care and everybody else is corrupt. I say if a man won't settle for a half a loaf the man isn't that hungry. A starving man would definitely take a half a loaf, even if he was owed a whole loaf, it it was the only way to survive. In the same way, I don't think people who refuse to compromise when the alternative is to get nothing at all want whatever is sought very much. If one is willing to let 40 million go without health care to carry out a symbolic losing effort at single payer, I conclude that person must not care very much about the 40 million who need health care. The folks who want to let Republicans win elections to teach Democrats a lesson don't care about any of the objectives they claim to support.

That's what makes me angry and that's why I've called people "far left."

[HughMoran]

85. The only thing worse than a thread that simply responds to a perceived sleight

...is when the small-minded "put upon" feel the need to recommend said thread to the Greatest Page.

:eyes:

[valerief]

86. Far left is a right wing derogatory term anyway, so of course it's bullshit. nt

[Buzz Clik]

88. What you described is, indeed, mainstream, and not just left.

A lot of center left and center right feel exactly the same way.

However, that hardly gets away from the fact that a lot of far left insanity is posted on this board.

[Swagman]

90. Naom Chomsky has said this for years after university research

conducted properly by his students but the media just skewers what Americans really want.

[TheKentuckian]

92. We have a majority that is to the left of the Republicans

but anything beyond that seems to be a stretch.
The Republicans are an extreme far right party. At least 40% (cheating and all) have voted Republican for at least two generations and usually much more than that. At least a third of Democrats are either fiscally or socially conservative, many both. Somewhere between a third and half of independents lean Republican. Not to mention those strongly on the progressive bandwagon until we start discussing terms. There were many of that bent in California.

I don't see it. There is a general approval on many issues but the rubber doesn't meet the road. People seem to be awfully disconnected between policies and the vote. Democrats (and by general proxy...liberals) have always had the issues but for a generation it has not translated in a meaningful way to getting the votes and resources to enact the policies. We have a working coalition that is in the majority at this moment, but as we are proud to declare...we don't do lockstep. We are everything from the Socialists to old School Republicans, what "we" want and what "we" are willing to do it is all but always up for debate and serious compromise. That's before we have to attempt to deal with the heathen, zombie hoard.

The far left stuff is bullshit though. There is for all intents and purpose no far left in America. The left is actually the middle to left of middle of a natural political spectrum. Unfortunately, in America we have a sizable minority of extremist on the right that shift the entire debate way to the right from the jump. They've now even driven most of the corporate toadies to us, giving themselves at least 15% over representation from a reflective standpoint and further diluting our agenda at the same time.

The game is very heavily loaded. Failure to accept and work through that is accepting failure. What we have to work with is a fickle majority that at the moment is willing to largely reconsider Reaganisim. We've got 10 times more mandate than W did but since he had, ignoring the shenanigans, near zero one should move and occasionally stretch but always be wary of overreaching. Much of our "progressive majority" seemed to have brought us Regan, Bush, and Worst. The polls ain't done shit about the direction this country has been plummeting. If people are so fucking progressive they can stop voting for the brown shirt mafia or sitting their worthless asses at home complaining while Liberty gets her ass whipped.

[EFerrari]

99. Barry Goldwater and Richard Nixon were to the left of these Republicans.

[Mythsaje]

93. Indeed...

Last I checked, none of us were Marxist... Well, some are, but very few people HERE. Thus, by strict definition, NOT "far left."

[Pushed To The Left]

96. We are better on the issues, but members of the far right are great salespeople

They are masters at turning people against one another and getting them to vote against their self interest. Their con job has made common sense positions appear to be "far left".