http://www.heritage.org/progressivism/co...ign=thf-fb

"America Divided: It Starts With the Democratic Party"

Interested in hearing from the "lefties" in here. Which do you prescribe to? Which to you take exception to? Do you even recognize the differing political views within the party?

I think I most identified with this section:

Quote:Contrary to all the hype, Sandersism is not socialism. It does not aim to nationalize industry and has no five-year plans. Rather, its brand of democratic socialism is really just a continuation of traditional progressivism: it aims to further regulate the economy — Wall Street in particular — and to enact European-style middle-class entitlements. The U.S. already provides generous benefits to the elderly (about 40% of the federal budget) and the non-elderly poor (about 20% of the federal budget). Sandersism wants to fill the gap and expand the welfare state to cover the non-elderly and the non-poor.

However misguided its policy prescriptions may be, Sandersism at least has the virtue of showing concern for the well-being of all Americans — including those who the identitarians ignore, if not revile. It is most convincing when urging Democrats to “go beyond identity politics,” as Sanders said after the election. “I come from the white working class,” he also tweeted, “and I am deeply humiliated that the Democratic Party cannot talk to the people where I came from.”

Excellent questions here:

Quote:The Democratic Party thus confronts many questions, chief among which is what should matter most: the needs of ordinary Americans — including those who do not have the privilege of having their identity recognized — or the demands of preferred groups? Should we give all Americans in need the same entitlements or should we give preferential treatment to favored groups? And what happens when the views of the people — on immigration or trade, for example — do not align with those of big business or of the elites who claim to know best?

The Democratic Party has so far successfully avoided these questions.

While I don't fully agree with all his statements and opinions, I thought it was a good read. Thanks! I think there is a definite party schism between classic demos. and progressives like myself. I think the goal for the two should be a united force but the current squabbles in Washington are over who gets the reigns. Do the Bernie and Warren group win out over established Hillarys? We'll see.

If I were a Sanders shill, I would be writing things like Bernie is not a socialist, too. I draw the line at socialism or communism at the point of massive redistribution of wealth and income. Sanders clearly crosses that line.

Looking at the author's five groups, I would put myself somewhere between reform conservatism and libertarian anti-statism. I have little or no use for identity politics, progressive class-based redistribution, or Trumpist populism.

Sort of surprised at the limited discussion. I thought it was a pretty well written piece that pretty much warns about further division within the democratic party.

(10-18-2017 10:41 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  Sort of surprised at the limited discussion. I thought it was a pretty well written piece that pretty much warns about further division within the democratic party.

Did you actually expect modern democrats to consider that there is anything wrong with their party... let alone be willing to discuss it?

It is a decent piece, but one that I seriously doubt any of my Democrat friends would be willing to give 2 seconds of consideration about. They'd rather focus on causing a media outcry about the the black, trans, handicapped kid that's being called names at middle school.

I don't think it identifies the divisions in the Republican Party very well. They have Trump populism (Trump), Libertarianism (Paul) and then lump everyone else into Reform Conservatism. Cruz, Carson and Bush are not part of the same group.

Although I lean left, I want nothing to do with the Democratic, or any other party for that matter.

Quote:the elites who enforce identity politics categorically forbid uttering any statement that they deem bigoted in any way. Native Americans may not object to the name Washington Redskins, but the bien pensants take offense on their behalf. They are the ones who decide what counts as racism — or any one of its corollary sins.

Spot on.

Quote:In fact, Democratic leaders have a hard time sympathizing with the majority of Americans who do not belong to a recognized identity group and reside in what is dismissively called “flyover country.” Hillary Clinton’s comment about the irredeemable “basket of deplorables” merely voiced a widespread sentiment among elite liberals.

Spot on.

Quote:Sandersism posits that the fundamental division in America is not along the lines of race, sex, sexual orientation, or any of the other preferred categories of identity politics, but rather class in the traditional sense of the term

Spot on.

Quote:The party thus runs of the risk of becoming a boutique, coastal and urban party disconnected from the concerns of ordinary Americans and contemptuous of their way of life. This would still allow it to win a majority of the popular vote in presidential elections, without however winning the electoral college vote or controlling Congress.

Bing-f'ing-go