My Progressive Manifesto
Throughout its history, the United States has evolved in fits and starts towards the “more perfect Union” that the Preamble to the Constitution gives as its first raison d’etre. This evolution comprises the journey towards universal suffrage, the recognition of full personhood irrespective of various accidents of birth, and the steady identification, promulgation and expansion of personal, human rights.
Indeed, throughout its dual history as a handbook for governance and a statement of what it means to be fully human in America, the Constitution has only once taken away a right in the name of a dubious righteousness, and that was in the Eighteenth Amendment: Prohibition. Recognition that this was a fool’s errand and not consonant with the purposes of the document led rightfully to repeal in the Twenty-First Amendment, the only such in our history.
The people pushing these forward changes have been called “liberal” or “progressive” or “radicals” or “reformers.” People resistant to change are known as “conservatives” or “reactionaries.” The Party labels for these factions have changed and reversed over time: Radical Republicans were violently and virulently against slavery, for example, while Conservative Democrats favored its expansion into the Territories and new States.
The arc of political history in America has always been like a pendulum’s, directed as times dictated, between the two extremes. We now find ourselves at the beginning of a long sweep away from a reactionary Republican conservatism that began in opposition to the New Deal and Great Society programs, and then swept America rightward during the Reagan years: Right politically, Right socially, Right religiously, Right economically, Right diplomatically and wrong in each and every case.
Fortunately, this retrograde march away from progress faced a countervailing popular culture that advanced the cause of acceptance in the face of a sullenly stubborn recidivism. Unfortunately, this only served to confirm the Rightistas in their righteous indignation, that America was an unrecognizable mutt offspring of too much acceptance of The Other bred to an over-permissive society. To do that, they invented their own shadow popular culture on talk radio, on cable TV and, laughably, within various entertainment genres.
However, now on the cusp of a long left-ward swing, the Progressive movement‘s pendulum is a broom poised to sweep all of that away, establishing a new center to the Left, and setting the stage for the next great expansion of American society towards justice, domestic tranquility, and general welfare; that is, towards that more perfect Union.
The Presidential election of 2016 is all the proof of this watershed moment we need. The Republican electorate, a fragmented pastiche of oft-competing conservative priorities, has been held together with bubble gum and baling wire almost since its inception, and has remained united only through its hatred of all things “liberal.” Use, however, had accustomed many of them to previously “liberal” concepts, as even the angriest of the Tea Party embraces the cognitive dissonance of “keep your government hands off my Medicare.”
That coalition is exploding, as the number of GOP candidates was well into double digits at the start of the election cycle, while the Democratic side only fielded a few, two of which were former Republicans. That alone illustrates the sea-change we are undergoing, but even more telling is the presence – and the success – of an avowed Socialist in the race.
It is clear now that the remaining viable candidates on the Republican side – Trump and Cruz – are unacceptable to the electorate in general and that at least one third of the Republican electorate will stay home or vote Democratic if either of them is the candidate. Given such an opportunity, the Democrats have taken it to move their platform to the Left, thanks again to the avowed Socialist, Bernie Sanders. Although he will probably not be nominated, it will be his platform that drives the rest of this race.
And that’s Progress. But that’s only a good start. In order to ensure that this progress continues, we must grow beyond the bounds of the 2016 election, and fundamentally remake the political underpinnings throughout the country, so that the last vestiges of the husky, brusque, Know-Nothing proto-fascism of today’s GOP can be swept out of public life at every level of government.
There were inklings of this during the 2008 election. Democrats regained control of both houses of Congress as well as the White House with an exciting grass roots campaign – Obama for America – that failed to carry its enthusiasm past electing Barack Obama, twice. Since then, heroic obstructionism on the part of Rightistas fighting a rearguard action has only exacerbated the problems that many thought we had overcome in that first flush of 2009 success.
Eight years wiser, and with an entire new crop of excited, motivated activists clamoring for the reins, we must not repeat the mistakes of the early Obama years, when the OFA momentum (now rechristened as Organizing for America) was squandered in a futile attempt to affect an unaffected and ineffectual Congress, especially during the Cap and Trade debate.
Instead, the Progressive movement must remain on the hustings, organizing on a state and local level, in order to take back the school boards, and the city councils, and the county boards, and the state assemblies, and the executive offices at all those levels, in order to undo the positive harm that has been done to real people in the name of Rectitude, but to the sole benefit of the rich and/or political.
The Progressive movement must become more than a movement, and actively take over the machinery of the Democratic Party, if possible, at the precinct, ward, township, county and state levels. If it is not possible to take over the organization, then we must fight from within it to nominate progressive candidates and build progressive platforms. And then we must take over government at each of those levels. We must build a governing coalition of Left-thinking individuals.
The Progressive movement must think in the long term, and act in the near term, every day.
The Progressive movement must not succumb to the mistakes made on the Right, and devise pledges or purity tests or other exclusionary criteria. The whole essence of the Progressive movement is that we embrace pluralism, we recognize competing priorities and contradictory ideas, and we compromise where necessary that PROGRESS be made.
Where we do NOT compromise is in the ultimate goals: that suffrage truly be universal; that respect for all lives and acceptance of all lifestyles truly be upheld; that stewardship of Earth is vital to all species, including us; that basic human needs are themselves rights; and that the Four Freedoms be truly practiced and protected: that religion be tolerated, but intolerance is not religious; that speech be protected, but money is not speech; that poverty is sinful, but the poor are not the sinners; that fearful is no way to live, and certainly no way to vote.
That respect for basic human dignity be freely given to all, demanded of all and defended by all.
Then we will have truly made Progress towards that more perfect Union, and secured the blessings of liberty for ourselves, and our posterity.
Beautiful, especially those last 3 paragraphs. Maybe you should be giving a platform speech at the Democratic convention??
1So say we all.
2I’m all in with Primo doing a speech at the convention, including a superset of this post.
@Primo
3snacilbupeR can’t help but vote fearfully simply because they live in abject fear of the greedy, disrespectful, uncivilized (by their standards) “other”. It IS a sad way to live and vote. And die. But, I suspect snacilbupeR would have it no other way.
A mighty goal, respect for human dignityand protection of the four freedoms, but you are so right, Primo, until we have that we have not reached a more perfect union. The challenges are: talking sense to the senseless, trying to reason with the unreasonable and agreeing on the objective truth with those who deny its existence. How to change minds which are terminally closed? Perhaps this can only be accomplished with the young, who are still open to questioning the lies they have been fed.
4Make it easy on the snacilbupeR. Return to the Eisenhower progressive tax rates to fund The Primo Progress.
5Primo, I agree with most of your astute commentary but I do question 2 issues you mention.
6Is there a difference in definition between “socialist” and “social democrat”? According to what I have read many times, Bernie says there is. If you conflate the two as being the same, are you not doing Bernie a disservice because of the pejorative perception in many peoples’ mind because of the tremendous propaganda effort of the rupert murdoch, et al, propaganda industry?
IMO, what you say to an apparently increasing audience has an influence and, if my perception, above, is correct, I need a logical explanation of how I am misguided, shall we say?
Next, 2008 election. I gather you were there during that time. If I recall, Dean built up a 50 state organization after having to convince the dnc to do so and raised a lot of small moneys and an effective grass roots turnout of dedicated progressives. Then I, and others, sat back and waited for Obama to play his 3-D game against the dedicated opposition of the repubs. And kept waiting. What I saw was the gradual transitioning of Obama into another insider big money raiser and let this grass roots organization wither on the vine metaphor. This organization seemed to me to be the answer for the repubs opposition that he could have marshaled at the local and national level to counter the repubs. Why did he fritter this away?
I couldn’t figure this out for some time. Then, a while back, I happened to read that before Obama ran for the senate, he was approached by a local leading female power broker who offered to introduce him to the right people in order to make his senate run as a black man, strange name, coming out of nowhere.
I have no trouble with believing Obama is the smartest guy in the room. The most logical, plausible, explanation as to why he reversed course from his progressive campaign pronouncements to his seemingly more conservative stance; eg, having as his financial advisers some of the same people who contributed to financial meltdown and going for the big money sources is that he made a deal back then.
Would you please give your input on these issues?
the OFA momentum (now rechristened as Organizing for America) was squandered
Thanks, Rahm!
7PKM, aspeaking of taxes, what became of Grover Norquist and his pledge crap? I have not heard thatname in about a year.
8A google search was of no help.
Well done, Primo. This should be served to high school civics classes.
9It’s a process, maryelle, a never-ending process. The Framers knew this when they said “a more perfect Union” instead of “a perfect Union” – not that the US is perfect and can be even perfecter (Make America Hate Again!) but that we can make Progress more towards perfection, we can grow to be more nearly perfect.
Perfection is an asymptote, not an endpoint.
PKM – that’s what’s great about the non-negotiable goals: money not being speech and true universal suffrage, combined with freedom from fearful voting, will create an atmosphere of informed consent of the governed.
In such an atmosphere, with a level electoral playing field, the height of tax rates and breadth of government spending can be debated and negotiated in good faith, instead of arguing against the ideological voodoo economics pledge that Grover Norquist pulled out of Art Laffer’s butt.
10Thank you, Primo. You have strengthened my resolve and enhanced my hope.
11gabberflasted, Grover Norquist was tried before the House and convicted by the Senate for un-American activities. Later that day he was taken to a Walmart in MD, shot out behind the building and disposed of in a dumpster. Oops. That would be justice, so unfortunately expect his carcass and ‘pledge’ to show up in Cleveland this summer.
The lady who beguiled President Obama away from his progressive values was Penny Pritzker, his current Secretary of Slavery. Hedging the Pritzker family bet, her brother was a member of the Hillary 2008 team. If Bro Pritzker is on the 2016 HRC Team, she would go a long way with me to establish her progressive creds, if she gave the little piker the boot.
12van – Bernie has self-advertised as a Socialist and has explained the label as being more social democrat-y etc etc, hence the use of the word “avowed.” Take up the labels with him, I just chose the one I’ve always known him by and admired him for having the cojones to use, until he committed to being a Democrat 4-evah 5 months ago. I think I made it quite clear that the meanings of the labels shift, but the underlying philosophies along the radical-liberal-conservative-reactionary continuum remain constant.
Obama – well, I’ma save my retrospective on him until he is out of office. But I will say that you are seriously omitting perspective from your picture of the Administration. I was not just there in 2008, I was part of OFA, and then I was part of the Franken recount, and then I watched how they fought that in the courts for months, and Obama had a 60-vote majority for just one month, it was July, 2009, during the recess, and then Teddy died, and the whole thing became something completely different.
There’s a long step between sleeping on strangers’ couches for 6 months and governance. OFA was new, different and there were a lot of questions as to how best make use of it. But it could not be integrated into the Democratic Party because there was WAY too much resistance from the State and County Parties, who were completely plugged into BEING the Party, and these OFA whippersnappers had just kicked their butts. So rather than being mindful of the people who had been there ahead of them, they dropped the party-building and tried to marshal what was left of the group – some of us needed to go back to real work – into activism on behalf of the legislative agenda.
But then, don’tcha know, there wasn’t going to BE a legislative agenda for the next 7 years. That was decided by GOP insiders at a toney DC eatery on Inauguration night, as we all have heard since.
So go peddle your money-man conspiracy theories elsewhere. They are counter-productive the the joint effort we must all make. The guy did the best he could with what he had, and better than anyone else I can imagine, considering what he was faced with. We now must take the steps necessary to ensure that future Democratic Presidents don’t face the same tough row to hoe. I don’t intend we make the same mistake twice and squander the second-chance moment that history has given us. But the organization has to grow from the bottom up, not be imposed from the top down.
Hence, my manifesto.
13Amen.
14Thanks, Primo, for your response.
15Let me clarify my point; I’m not peddling money-man theories. I stated that from what I’ve read/heard from Obama’s run into 2008 election that what transpired didn’t seem to make sense esp for us who voted for him – me, twice – based upon what I understood him to say.
By my meaning you were there is that you were, and still are, a key, knowledgeable player in this political game and meant my comment as a compliment. I had hoped to present my points precisely for your more knowledgeable input.
Since I had already admitted, or at least implied, that I may have “seriously omitting perspective” on his admin, I wanted you to bring me up to date because I believed you had most of the answers or a damned good take on what I was hearing and trying to find a reason for what appeared to be conflicting actions of Obama.
You have chosen for now not to say anything retrospectively about Obama till he’s out of office wherein I don’t think, therefore, that you addressed my points but instead I feel you attacked me with the peddle comment which I don’t think is fair.
Yes, part of trying to get into a deep subject in a format like this is difficult at best. Much better venue would be a place with chili verde and beer.
I applaud your participation in those actions you mentioned. I did not do anything close to that.
I grew up in a gop family of the old school repubs and voted first time for Goldwater because my parents did.
Over the years I gradually became a liberal leaning independent. Today I have trouble understanding what the gop has become and am pretty much totally against them and their acolytes.
At the same time, if I perceive the dems doing some of the same things that I fault today’s repubs for doing, I’m not going to let that slide.
Bernie has run as an independent of both parties while caucusing with the dems. IMO, this gives him more credibility of not being bound to the insiders of either party.
Correct me if my understanding is wrong, if Bernie had tried to run as an independent, he’d never have gotten as far as he has so far.
I want to see the 1%ers; ie, the kochs, et al and all their bought lackeys, consigned to the dust bin of history like yesterday. But what good would come of that if we stoop to some of the same underhanded tactics they employ?
with resect, van
Only Bernie is actually positioned where progressive opportunity needs liberals to be by your narrative and I concede he won’t win the endorsement. All the rest of the Party is infested with large and institutional donor funding. Until that changes nothing changes. My canary in the coal mine is the “carried interest rule” and the Democrats have that bird singing from the rafters. An incrementally Democratic Congress will still be wholly owned.
16Sorry Primo, meant “respect”. Some commie-nazi-independent-1%er musta snuck in somehow and changed it while I was fulminating.(;
17Well put, Primo!
18In the weighting of the Hillary or Bernie question, I am so happy tonight that we don’t have all the problems of the snacilbupeR.
Albeit, it was amusing observing Ksuchasheis goy ‘splaining to the wrong group of Hasidim for 4 hours. He thought he was speaking to a Zionist sect. What a schmuck!
Back to Primo’s premise.
19Excellent Primo! Kudos and huzzahs for your entire manifesto! Can I share it with my liberal friends? With attribution, your pseudonym, of course.
” . . . could not be integrated into the Democratic Party because there was WAY too much resistance from the State and County Parties, who were completely plugged into BEING the Party, . . ”
A progressive/liberal group in SD has been trying to get something going which will have the side effect of breathing life into the moribund and nearly dead Democratic party. The biggest problem? The South Dakota Democratic Party. Argh!
20And total respect to you too, my friend! My rhetoric sometimes soars Icariously close to the sun.
21So, in featherance of our mutual respect, I’ll try not to egg you on:)
22Don’t forget that we need to take over the state legislatures in time for redistricting in 2020.
23Nicely stated. But NEVER assume that any kind of progress cannot be derailed by apathy, self-assured ignorance, blatant stupidity, outright and transparent corruption, and complex cheating schemes. The 2016 election has the typical opportunity for self-inflicted political suicide: democrats and other progressive and liberal elements who stay home and don’t vote. Whether it be apathy, dislike of the chosen candidate, cynicism, or whatever, Democratic voters have repeatedly allowed the GOP to override them by sitting on their asses. If you don’t want to see conservative idiocy continue to run this country, no matter what your reasons or excuses, GET OUT AND VOTE DEMOCRAT.
24Why are we so much more reasonable and accepting of others on this site than what I read on others? The almost hating the other side when the other side is ours also! My biggest concern is that Cruz will be elected, and although I support Hillary, I would gladly vote for Bernie if he is nominated. Anything but the Republican choices out there!
25Thanks, Primo. I always come away from your contributions here with a greater understanding of what is happening around me.
Step 1: Get progressives/liberals/Democrats to start voting every time in every election.
26Now to hear The Rest of the Story. Primo is actually 265 years old. He was supposed to be the fourth author of The Federalist Papers but didn’t turn his work in on time.
27@Maryelle: I believe I made some progress last weekend. I met a young man at the bus stop, and sat with him on the bus. He was headed back to Long island after volunteering at a food bank. He defined himself as a Christian. I explained why I support Bernie Sanders, whom he believed is a Communist. I explained, quietly and patiently, what Democratic Socialism is, and how it’s not just good for me and mine, but for all the people he’s helping at the food bank, and even for him.
Register and vote in every primary and every general, every election, every year.
28Your Mouth to God’s(And every Thinking person in this country’s) ear!!!
29“Makes me want to shout, Halleluyer……!”
Van 59: actually I rather love your use of “resect”, in the surgical sense.
30Very well put. I think what needs to be remembered is that our very government (be its constitution and institutions) are set up to maintain the status quo. Every president has a limited opportunity to push through true change of every kind. Obama chose health care and while progressives will knock the watered down version of the ACA, progressives have been trying to reform the insurance industry since Truman. The fact that any legislation was passed was a minor miracle. I think the next 4/8 years brings some difficult choices as to what those priorities should be. My two cents is to reform the electoral process itself. In that vain, I would put forward three suggestions:
1) All district lines will be drawn by computer. There will be no back room deals by the party in control. True representation should be a given and not dependent on who wins an election every ten years.
2) We must past a new voters right act where election rules for all national elections are standardized. That means no voter ID laws, that means standardized hours of operation, that means standardized absentee rules, and standardized ballots. Even if only one or two races are national, these standardized rules must be abided by.
3) All general elections are publicly funded. In short, if the Koch brothers want to buy the GOP nominee that’s great, but once you get to the general election there is no corporate money. There’s no individual donor money. It’s all provided by the tax payers.
31Scott, 1) & 2) are great. 3) needs some work. Mostly I wouldn’t limit the dark money to just the general. The big donors have been all too successful in buying local school boards, state legislatures and any county office they deem suitable to rubber stamp their plans to scorch the environment.
I’d consider a 4) to take a swipe at voter apathy. Our election cycles are too long, in some cases endless. The 2007 cycle never ended; it morphed into 2015. One year for a presidential election, maybe?
5) reform state primaries and how we campaign. Costly marathon bus tours through Iowa? Really? Paying for SS protection for the Outlaw Jersey Whale to graze in NH for months? In the age of telecommunications and social media, candidates can ‘get out there message’ easily without swilling down corn dogs and traipsing through the snow.
32there, their, they’re … my grammar is ok; my keyboarding is best described by words Mama won’t permit.
http://crooksandliars.com/files/imagecache/node_primary/primary_image/16/04/historic.jpg
33No matter who wins the Democratic primary, the other candidate needs to immediately start beating the party unity drum AND the idea that all those energized followers have to keep the energy going for every single down-ballot race, your ever and ever, amen. As an example of why this is so important, Bernie won Wisconsin, but many of the ballots were only marked for that race. This allowed the winger crazy lady state supreme court judge to win, and she’ll be the vote they need to pass right to work in that state; a huge loss for progressive governance in WI.
The single biggest mistake Democratic voters make is thinking that the President is the end all and be all of offices, and none of the rest count. They all count, a huge amount! If the people who are involved in politics for the first time this election STAY involved, we’d win from here on out. The trick is getting their chosen leader to keep pushing for that once their chance at the nomination is gone.
34thank you Primo. Applause! Applause!
Change happens from the bottom up. Not from the Top down.
35http://www.politicususa.com/2016/04/14/democrats-crush-plot-steal-2016-election-lawsuit-arizona-gop.html
Serve notice on the snacilbupeR that we are on to them and keep a bright spotlight on their efforts to disenfranchise voters. Turn their efforts around on them, so that even the most apathetic citizen not only registers to vote, but actually votes this year to thwart the snacilbupeR.
36PKM,
I thought of all that, but the problem comes where the party process exists extraconstituionally making it difficult to govern at the Congressional level. As Primo pointed out, we must win at the state and local level as well. Congress really has no business regulating how we should elect our dog catchers. The big problem with parties themselves is that they get to make their own rules. Those rules are enacted in order to get a certain outcome (namely winning elections) that don’t always jive with the will of the people. For instance, the Democrats decided Hillary would give them the best chance to win, so they set up the rules to aide in that aim. The Republicans discovered their lengthy 2012 process weakened Romney, so they shortened it. I think while we would all want a level playing field, we have to acknowledge the fact that parties aren’t in the business of establishing level playing fields. They are established to win elections. I certainly think repealing CU would help, but you can render that case moot with legislation. The constitution establishes that there will be House, Senate, and presidential races. It doesn’t address primaries. So, regulating the general election is both easy and constitutional. Regulating primaries is much more problematic.
37Primo- had you glued your wings with dilbit (tarsands crud) the heat would only make the glue stickier. Let that be a lesson to you.
38