|
How U.S. And UK “Liberals” Disfranchise Their Party Members
The "liberal" party establishments in the U.S. and UK, within the Democrats and Labour, are united in their distaste for party member opinions. They alone want to decide which positions the party has to take. They want to make sure that there is no alternative to their rule. It is elitism at its worst which no longer bothers with the pretense of democracy. Does it count as "shared values"?
Bernie Sanders folded. This without gaining any significant concession from Hillary Clinton on programmatic or personal grounds. (At least as far as we know.) He endorsed Clinton as presidential candidate even as she gave no ground for his voters' opinions. This disenfranchises the people who supported him.
Trump's attack lines on this are spot on:
Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump – 7:01pm · 12 Jul 2016
Bernie Sanders endorsing Crooked Hillary Clinton is like Occupy Wall Street endorsing Goldman Sachs.
and
Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump – 7:03pm · 12 Jul 2016
Bernie sanders has abandoned his supporters by endorsing pro-war pro-TPP pro-Wall Street Crooked Hillary Clinton.
Those are valid statements. I find it hard to to argue with these.
Abstaining from any endorsement or running as independent or Green party candidate would have been more honorable ways for Sanders to admit defeat. It would have pressed the Democratic party to stop its movement to the right of the Republican party.
I expect the "Not Hillary" protest vote to be very strong in the November election. There is still more significant dirt to be dug up about her and her family foundation. Trumps current lows in the polls will recover when the media return to the "close race" mantra that makes them money. He still has a decent chance to win.
Then again – its the first time now that I have to concede that Clinton may well win. But that would be with a record low turnout, and record low legitimacy. There would be no wins for the Democrats in the Senate and House. She would be another Republican President who would represent only a record small slice of the electorate.
The election shambles on the other side of the Atlantic are no less depressing. "Corbyn can not win votes," is the claim of the anti-Corbyn Blairites. That is why they have to resort to dirty tricks to disenfranchise Corbyn voters. His supporters are not allowed to count in a Labour leadership election because they support him. How can such "logic" and this step be legal?
Jeremy Corbyn was jubilant after the party’s ruling national executive committee (NEC) decided his name should automatically appear on the ballot paper in the leadership contest triggered by Angela Eagle.
…
However, in a separate decision taken after Corbyn had left the room, the NEC ruled that only those who have been members for more than six months will be allowed to vote – while new supporters will be given two days to sign up as registered supporters to vote in the race, but only if they are willing to pay £25 – far higher than the £3 fee many Corbyn backers paid in the contest last year.
If that ruling stands nearly 100,000 new party members who have joined in support of Corbyn will either have to immediately pay a poll-tax of £25, or will not be allowed to vote. Here is what the Labour website promised them when they joined:
Corbyn may need some lawyers to set the NEC straight.
One can only hope that he wins the new Labour leadership election. The Labour establishment stinks like an Augias stable and the party needs a thorough house cleaning.
Yes, masks are coming off.
Per continuing scrutiny of the Brexit campaign(s) I have often read that Cameron was not genuinely behind Remain. I can’t judge that. Certainly his alea jacta est (some argue the saying orginally was ‘let the die be cast’ in the sense of ‘let the game begin’) attitude to the whole matter signals ambivalence. (I get the political machinations behind it.)
Now we see the major Leave Figures, Farage, Johnson, Gove, promptly bowing out, doing their own Br-pol-exit (or called backstage!) with the most important figure, ambivalent at best, or following other sirens, Cameron, gone as well, singing toodle-oo or what not on his way out. (link, funny even if fake)
As figureheads only T. May and Corbyn are still on stage – both gingerly remain supporters, most likely because of various pol. pressures, calculations, etc.
Brexit has been deemed to be the most crucial vote since WWII, and the main parties were split on it. Btw the anarchists supported Remain (!)
These parties have to go, and new parties should be formed. However, new parties can’t be formed because of the grip of finance/banks, US control, mega corps, Milit. complex, etc. etc. acting behind the scenes, aka, entrenched power circuits, old-boys type on the take for sure, more importantly the extremely vicious, embedded, encrusted in, controllers of, the traditional pol. parties.
In what ppl imagine a ‘democracy’ to be, or hope it would be, it would be natural for Corbyn, Sanders, and Trump to simply start a new Party. That doesn’t happen because the control from the top is very effective. Sanders, an Independent, ran as Dem, and Trump as Rep, Corbyn as Labour, etc.
Hopefully ppl are waking up to this sham-democracy BS. Realistically, what can they do?
I’m overall not optimistic. As for ppl who advise voting for X or Y ‘official’ candidates, I have no words.
https://youtu.be/-Gz6mZYxS0A
Posted by: Noirette | Jul 13 2016 15:55 utc | 42
@ 16 Mark Stoval
“I would ask a favor. Could someone please tell me how we define “right and left” here? I know that many people have different definitions of those terms.”
There is no ‘we’ here… that is to say, IMO posters here do not participate in ‘groupthink’ – I don’t think you meant to imply that, but rather you seek clarity on the terms “right and left” from the group.
via Wiki – Political Science defines:
The left–right political spectrum is a system of classifying political positions, ideologies, and parties. Left-wing politics and right-wing politics are often presented as opposed, although a particular individual or group may take a left-wing stance on one matter and a right-wing stance on another. In France, where the terms originated, the Left has been called “the party of movement” and the Right “the party of order.”[1][2][3][4] The intermediate stance is called centrism and a person with such a position is a moderate.
Amongst published researchers, there is agreement that the Left includes anarchists, communists, socialists, progressives, anti-capitalists, anti-imperialists, believers in civil rights,[5] democratic socialists, greens, left-libertarians, social democrats, and social liberals.[6][7][8]
Researchers have also said that the Right includes capitalists, conservatives, monarchists, nationalists, neoconservatives, fascists,[9] neoliberals, reactionaries, racists,[10] imperialists, right-libertarians, social authoritarians, religious fundamentalists, and traditionalists.[11]
SOURCE
@50 Ben
“…For me, right and left are old terms. In today’s world you’re either pro-corporate, or pro-people. Decide for yourself, which faction should rule.”
I totally agree. The American political system today is, IMO, Totalitarian, with corporations having become the State.
Totalitarianism is a political system where the state recognizes no limits to its authority and strives to regulate every aspect of public and private life wherever feasible.
Source
Corporate statism or state corporatism is a political culture and a form of corporatism whose adherents hold that the corporate group which is the basis of society is the state. The state requires all members of a particular economic sector to join an officially designated interest group.
Source
Corporate Statism (again… IMO) is successfully dividing the ‘People” in order to impede any effort to gain or regain control of the government. But that is not the half of it, as we the people oppose each other without any encouragement from the State. That is to say, we throw labels at each other (communist, liberal, anti-semite, faggot, and on and on)most of us invisible to others by virtue of the internet.
The Feral Irishman is reporting the hacktivist group Anonymous is now calling for nationwide Day of Rage protests on Friday, July 15th. Zerohedge has post up top wrt the report, listing locations and times, with warning to be “aware but not there” – so, we’re on the one hand advised by posters at ZH to grab a pitchfork etc. and on the other hand to not take to the streets on Saturday.
We as a People appear to be more angry at ‘the other’ than we are at the ‘oppressors’ and too ‘fearful’ to do anything outside of banging on the keyboard.
Posted by: crone | Jul 13 2016 18:32 utc | 69
|
