Good Question: "Are we Democratic or Underground...

[Goldstein1984]

...or both?"

NOTE on Edit: The original question is from an OP by JohnnyLib2

This question comes from another post that was pushed to <0 status by unrecs. But I thought the question was worth considering, so I'm starting it over with my own thoughts on the question.

From "About DU": "...exchange and dissemination of liberal and progressive ideas...one of the premier left-wing websites...one of the Web's most active left-wing discussion boards...welcome Democrats of all stripes, along with other progressives...this website is not affiliated with the Democratic Party..."

Unless I remember the 60s incorrectly, "underground" has nothing to do with the mainstream of anything. In fact, the need to be "underground" is a rejection of the mainstream. If DU is really the Democratic "Underground," then the Democratic mainstream is the DU's right-wing fringe, rather than progressives being its left-wing fringe.

As one post by njmaverick in another thread pointed out, there is little difference between this Democratic Administration and the last one. The last Democratic Administration gave us NAFTA, GATT, repeal of Glass-Steagall, and was generally a continuation of the free trade voodoo economics that ultimately brought us to where we are now--Reagan/Bush Light.

The real battle isn't between the Democrats and Republicans, or between the mainstream and fringes of each party; the real battle is a class struggle between the Haves, who have taken control of our government and is undermining representative government, and the Have-nots, who have been driven back to the days preceding the Great Depression by late 20th Century Robber Barons who began dismantling the New Deal the moment Ronald Reagan became President.

We should all be underground.

[OHdem10]

1. Very interesting points. More truth than poetry.

[Goldstein1984]

2. Damn! I was really going for the poetry.

Thanks!

[saracat]

22. Well you have acheived both! Truth is poetry!

[mirrera]

3. k&R

Until this gets answered, I am very uncertain of what Democratic underground is. It is a great time to have that conversation because we have very interesting times and a clear division in the "Party" that should be able to be hashed out... underground.

[Goldstein1984]

6. Having only been here for 3 weeks, all I'm working from is my

expectations.

There seems to be a bit of an identity crisis.

For me, democracy isn't a party, it's liberty. Liberty isn't possible if bound to a party platform.

I believe it was Jefferson who said, "To adopt a platform is to abandon reason."

Since both parties seem to be captives of Wall Street, allegiance to either seems dangerous.

[geek tragedy]

4. It is what its owners say it is.

No one--not you or I--gets to decide whose views are acceptable and whose aren't.

[Goldstein1984]

That's why I never use an unrec

If this is a democratic site, no views should be unacceptable.

But you could never tell by some of the condemnations and the way unrecs are used to bury unpopular views.

"Democracy" was not considered a good thing by the Founders and Framers--the considered it synonymous with mob rule. If they were here and reading some of the exchanges on DU, they would have proof.

[mirrera]

10. There are rules...

but they are confusing at times, and it is contradictory to say that DU is not affiliated with the Party, and welcomes progressives, but It says we must not advocate for a 3rd party candidate above a Democratic candidate. Still even contradictory, it is understandable. What is hard to understand is that right now we are FINALLY in between elections and if ever there was a time for discussion, clarification, protest and persuasion this would be it. Even Obama said to push him. There are so many other places to Rah Rah Sis Boom Bah.

[muriel_volestrangler]

27. No, it's not contradictory at all

The statement that DU is not affiliated with the Democratic Party is straightforward and factual. DU is not supported by the party, nor does it send money to the party. It doesn't have any input in the running of the party, and the party doesn't have any input in running it.

But the owners say members must not advocate for 3rd party candidates over Dems. That's not a contradiction. We also mustn't advocate genocide, but that doesn't mean there's an affliation with Amnesty International, who are similarly opposed to genocide.

Some seem to feel that there are Democrats that anyone who calls themselves 'progressive' must actively oppose; but the definition of progressive seems flexible enough to me, and I think to the admins here, that it's possible for a progressive to hold their tongue even if they do feel personally that a certain Democrat has to be defeated by a 3rd party candidate. And for the vast majority of time, DU members do manage that - even ones that hold views well to the left of anyone active in the Democratic party.

The DU rules do point out that constructive criticism of Democrats is fine.

[LooseWilly]

21. A true appeal to authority, and attempt to encourage all and sundry to acquiesce to said authorities

Monarchs and Robber Barons alike would be proud to have you over at the company picnic.

Let acceptable be defined by the owners. How very Laissez Faire...

[geek tragedy]

32. The website is their property.

Sorry, but they set the rules. All members are here at their pleasure and permission.

[SoCalDem]

5. neither.. n.t

[BunkerHill24]

7. don't manure it, nor master it.....it's called democraticUndergound

VIVE!


Happy New Year!

[babylonsister]

8. Baloney. The 'haves' have taken control of our government? Where

were you the past 8 years? :eyes:

[Goldstein1984]

9. In my post, I state:

"...a class struggle between the Haves, who have taken control of our government..."

I have not doubt the people have lost control. And I also am sure that nothing we do inside the system is going to take back control. We need activism: boycotts, general strikes, divesting from banks and stocks, reduced consumerism...

I'm also willing to concede that things may have to get worse before they get better.

I believe a truly democratic underground movement is the only thing that can save this republic.

We have only two conventional weapons to use: our vote and our dollars.

[babylonsister]

13. Ah jeeze. Things are getting better, not worse now. And because a Dem was

elected, the republic has been saved. Stand by and watch, don't wring your hands in horror. You should have been horrified the past 8 years. I was.

[Goldstein1984]

15. I was more than horrified, I was also ashamed.

I don't see things getting better. I see increased Predator drone strikes and civilian deaths; I see an increasing military presence in Columbia; I see an escalation in Afghanistan, no draw-down in Iraq, and the possible addition of Yemen; I see an HCR bill that mandates citizens to buy insurance they can't afford to use; and I see no retreat from the deterioration of the constitution under USA Patriot.

"And because a Dem was elected, the republic has been saved."?? -- I'm not seeing it.

I'm not wringing my hands in horror, nor am I standing by and watching.

For reasons I described above, the switch from Republican to Democrat doesn't mean what it pretends.

[mirrera]

16. exactly... n/t

[cali]

26. Some things are getting better. Others aren't.

at least be honest about that. And the people have never been in control.

What's gotten better?

The judiciary. some foreign policy. (The war in Afghanistan is a fucking travesty) Stem cell research, the Ledbetter Act, environmental policy, to name a few.

[Goldstein1984]

29. Very little foreign policy.

Honduras was a bust. We're following the same path with Latin America.

The people have never had less control than they do now, but you are correct, representative government is partially an American myth.

[DJ13]

11. But ....didnt we expect that to change under Obama?

[Jax]

20. where were you on December 12, 2000 ?

[burning rain]

12. For my own part, I'm a lefty every day of the year (perhaps that makes me Undergound)...

and a party-line Democrat the first Tuesday after the first Monday each November.

k & r

[JohnnyLib2]

14. Underground movements can be effective---or disastrous.

Or at least there were plenty of examples during the Viet Nam period, when choices could be truly life-changing.

The course of events on DU is a learning experience for me and the next evolution is unclear. Having always been somewhere between "underground" and "loyal opponent" IRL, the skin is thick. The tolerance for shouting each other down isn't.

[Goldstein1984]

17. Surgery can be effective or disastrous

The shouting-down not only accomplishes nothing, it alienates. So does invalidating another person's concerns.

Based on what I'm hearing an reading, the Obama Administration lost themselves a lot of progressive voters this week.

As I wrote in another post, the only weapons citizens have is their money and their votes. If I am forced to do so, I'm willing to use my vote to teach respect.

[valerief]

18. I guess a definition of the 'overgrounders' is in order.

:kick:

[laughingliberal]

19. K & R

Perfectly explained as always.

[LouKneeLib]

23. Great post.

I would argue that when legislative "Democrats" represent right-wing action and ideology, then they are no longer representative of the "left". They must be fought against within our democratic process with as much vigor and determination as we used to defeat the RepubliCons in 2006 and 2008.

There is nothing "left" about the DLC. Their is nothing "left" about "cheering on" the same doctrines and ideologues that brought us NAFTA, health care mandates, abortion compromise, welfare reform, corporate handouts, and most scarily "message discipline".

So as to the OPs original question - I would argue that supporting DLC DINOs is certainly not supportive of the left. And support for the left I assume was the purpose of this website. Now, we can all enjoy civil debate here on DU. But when it comes time to primary, I'm with the progressives. If that results in a DINO loss, then so be it. Maybe they will learn their lesson the next go round. Eventually, they will get the memo that "just ignore the left" is a highly ineffective strategy. Or we could just embrace the status quo and bitch about it casually on DU.

When the primaries come, I'm with the progressives.

[bvar22]

24. What?....couldn't hear ya!

All this dirt keeps clogging up my ears!

bvar22
Tunneling through the Undergrounds since the 60s.
:hippie:

If the Democratic Party ever returns to its roots and re-joins FDR, LBJ, JFK, Wellstone, Kucinich,and Sanders, I'll join the Democratic Party Establishment.
Until then.....


"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans. I want us to compete for that great mass of voters that want a party that will stand up for working Americans, family farmers, and people who haven't felt the benefits of the economic upturn."---Paul Wellstone

[cali]

25. pretentious stuff.

It's just a discussion board. I love it, but that's all it is. A few other points: You were pretty selective about what you chose to reprint from the "about" section. As I recall, there's also that bit about posters being expected to support dem candidates. And yes, DU is to the left of the mainstream of the party.

I do see it, at least in part, as between dems and republicans. those are the only parties that count in American politics, and I utterly reject the Republican platform and what republicans believe in and stand for. And there's always a tug-a-war for power in each party. that's just a fact.

As for "we should all be underground" what does that even mean. DU is a for profit site with ads for pity's sake.

[muriel_volestrangler]

28. If you want a defintion for 'underground', I suggest the 'About Us' page

I think this is it:

The content for the site is provided by people who feel that their views are not represented by the conservative "mainstream" media in the U.S.

There's nothing on that page about being against the Democratic party organisation; the media is the target.

[Goldstein1984]

30. Answering a couple of replies...

I wasn't selective with my quotes from about DU. There's an ongoing argument stated bluntly or implied in many of the threads, and that argument is based, it seems to me, in the difference between a democrat and a Democrat. I just picked the parts that addressed that issue.

As far as "pretentious" goes, I think pretentious would be to wear the label "underground" when all you are advocating is run-of-the-mill party platform stuff and working completely within the system to do it.

To me, "underground" implies going outside of the system. I don't know where or when activism got a bad name, but nothing is going to change without it. It wasn't Republicans protesting the Vietnam War, or marching with Martin Luther King, or in the fields marching with Cesar Chavez. It was Democrats, and it made a difference in every case.

Arianna Huffington calling for people to pull money out of too-big-to-fail banks--that kind of stuff makes change happen. If, that is, people can be bothered to do it.

[laughingliberal]

33. Excellent, as always

As one who was out there protesting the Viet Nam war and right in the middle of the civil rights battles, I will attest to the fact it was not Republicans out there with us. And it was not the timid wing of the Democratic party, either.

[Goldstein1984]

35. I was only twelve when I road along with my older cousin

to anti-war protests. Later, as a teen, I joined protests by the United Farm Workers across the street in the tomato and lettuce fields. There wasn't anything resembling a Republican or a "respectable" democrat in sight.

The shame is that so many of those who were opposed to Vietnam now seem so comfortable with sending another generation off to die in a war that is just as meaningless.

[Goldstein1984]

31. Answering a couple of replies...

I wasn't selective with my quotes from about DU. There's an ongoing argument stated bluntly or implied in many of the threads, and that argument is based, it seems to me, in the difference between a democrat and a Democrat. I just picked the parts that addressed that issue.

As far as "pretentious" goes, I think pretentious would be to wear the label "underground" when all you are advocating is run-of-the-mill party platform stuff and working completely within the system to do it.

To me, "underground" implies going outside of the system. I don't know where or when activism got a bad name, but nothing is going to change without it. It wasn't Republicans protesting the Vietnam War, or marching with Martin Luther King, or in the fields marching with Cesar Chavez. It was Democrats, and it made a difference in every case.

Arianna Huffington calling for people to pull money out of too-big-to-fail banks--that kind of stuff makes change happen. If, that is, people can be bothered to do it.

[L0oniX]

34. It's only democratic in membership. The site is not. No members vote on how things are done...

or what the rules are. Underground? heh ...that's a stretch. There are plenty of pro troop, pro military here and centrists ...even center right ...that's not how I experienced the 60's underground while I was living in Haight Ashbury. Left was total anti war at any cost ...anti establishment ...anti plastic people ...pro peace ...and willing to protest war ...and willing to hide draft dodgers.