What's wrong with the 'Left' in US Politics?

April 25, 2005 00:30 by keithkaragan
Nothing and everything is wrong with the American Left. Aside from the various issues I may agree with, and those that I'd oppose, the greatest failing of the American Left is that is so fragmented and splintered that is politically impotent. This is nothing new, as the 1970's rolled around the power of the leftist movements in the US suffered dramatic changes in it's message and leadership that resulted in huge gaps in the ideology that resulted in the absence of a progressive liberal political platform. The ranks of the left became a mess of mass with a small arsenal of liberal thinkers  scattered through a nasty mesh of scattered incoherent mixed messages.
I saw this first hand in the early 1990's surrounding protests to the first Gulf War. The 'movement' consisted of Representative of a large array of other liberal, radical, religious, and some just plain silly organizations that showed up for the same events but did not try to come together to send a unified message. Instead they battled and argued with each other for media time, and put their organization's message before that of the 'movement' - hence there was no 'movement', no brotherhood, no message sent - except one of fragmentation, which is exactly what the opposition loves to hear.
Fast forward to the 2000 and 2004 elections and we see it again, only worse. How would the liberal movement of the 1960's have reacted to an election result like that of 2000? How would the political population of the 1930's, 1940's, or 1950's reacted? It's unlikely that these generations would have been as passive as we were in light of the circumstances - There would have been far more debate, even if the result was the same. Other 'democratic' countries have popular revolutions over incidents less blatant - we didn't even get all that upset. Why? Consider the lessons learned (by governing bodies) over the last half century about controlling societies. These are not theoretical, they are applied to the current political state. The left is legless today, and it's a damn shame because it is filled with intelligent, caring people that really want to forward the humanistic agenda. This can't happen though, if the Constitution is pulled out from underneath them.
In 2004 the great 'left' hope was John Kerry. A man who was part of the liberal, left movement that was so strong in the 1960's. A man who has participated n government ever since. Unfortunately the best message he could muster up was that he was not George Bush. The best messages that the left could muster up were ones of attack of George Bush. Not to say that the criticism isn't warranted, but the voting public's needs were not met, no positive messages of what they were going to do got through clearly and made an impression. How can that be? All these intellectuals, and all these ideas resulted in a hollow message. Even with this pathetic platform George Bush won by a narrow margin, imagine if the Democrats had a message - they would have easily won the election.
Worry not though for John Kerry and the Democrats, nothing would have changed anyway. Sure, it would appear that it did. Some social programs, and other things would be enacted - but the Democratic party is just as owned by the fascist regime as the republican party is. A viable third party is the only way to effectively correct the direction of the government from this rotten and corrupt culture of selling our rights for money and power and this cannot happen without broad third party support - local government positions, state positions, congress, and the executive branch. This is no small task, and cannot happen overnight, or without cohesive support that spurs from the bonding of people with widely disparate viewpoints that support parties that will enforce core values that benefit all Americans. This has been the Constitution since our county's inception, and needs to return to this. These rights cover the core issues to ensure we are not burdened with tyranny, and allow personal choice in the pursuits we have. Without this, we are in real danger that will become very personal and very physical.
The legislation of personal ethical and spiritual beliefs doesn't belong in our national government. Our government needs to be transparent to these issues, allowing the populous to pursue their will without inhibition unless it infringes upon the freedom of others. State and local legislatures can fine tune these laws to best reflect the local societies needs.
I encourage people of any political leaning to consider a re-branding themselves to a common platform. What concessions would you be willing to make in your political positions to grow a larger organization that focuses on core issues (the Constitution) and guarantees of freedom? How would this possibly affect your life for better and worse? Can you bear the worst of this without great pain? Can you envision the benefits for the society as a whole? What would it take for you to affiliate yourself with a political entity that meets this vision?
Digg It!DZone It!StumbleUponTechnoratiRedditDel.icio.usNewsVineFurlBlinkList

Be the first to rate this post

  • Currently 0/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Related posts

Comments are closed