In our YouGov survey of 3,000 voters in the Rust Belt States of Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, and Wisconsin, 57 percent of the respondents supported a new political formation outside the two major parties; Only 19 percent opposed.
Les, you don't have to apologize for doing your job. We on the activist side need accurate info to argue our case effectively--and you know the econ trickle up defenders (neolibs) of the D party and their media allies aren't about to.
At 77, I'm too old to do organizing from the ground up. But as a veteran of both labor and political organizing, I could for sure serve as an advisor. If anyone thinks now is very different from then, my 1st piece of advice is to read the farmer-labor Populists, Eugene V. Debs, the C.I.O. organizers of the 1930s, and MLK.
My 2nd piece is to learn basic econ theory. The American and by extension the world econ system is justified by assertions with little empirical evidence. They're no more than a deep hatred for the New Deal and Keynesianism. Which were proven effective thus why the econ elites fear them. So we have a center-left economics that works with and for labor. The facts are on our side; working people need to hear that.
The D apologist argument about 3rd parties, that Nader cost Gore the election, is all sorts of wrong. It's just another red herring to deflect attention away from the fact the Ds haven't offered anything of substance for decades. And that they're sponsored by the same 1%er and corporate elites as the Rs.
Most grating is the D party assumption our votes belong to them. Plus that "lesser of two evils" ploy, like upper income elitist Ds believe they can get away with offering us crumbs from their table. Nader got votes because he was what we wanted to vote FOR. BTW, Dems, the non-voters are saying NO to you, too! As young supporters of Bernie said to the elite DNC: get it through your heads--you don't own us. We're outsiders, independents who might vote D if you actually field a candidate we can vote for. Same then for an avowedly pro-labor party, especially when the working class is the majority. Give us what we need to survive or we will do it ourselves.
PS: A last piece of advice that might seem irrelevant to pol and econ issues, but is even more basic. When we talk about the common good, implicitly we're invoking ethics. In addition, the question of the meaning of life. Is it merely to accumulate material goods? Granted, physical basics must take precedence. But working with and for each other is also to enable each person to find purpose. I'm saying spiritual concerns and artistic expression, what in academia are known as the humanities, are the other half of what makes us human. Let's not forget that.
My main thesis is long enough; here's a separate comment on "charismatic leader." The idea is total b.s. The implication is we lessers aren't capable.
The capitalist and bureaucratic version is exposed in those offensive and excruciatingly dull "leadership" seminars predicated on the assumption the attendees buy into the belief they're superior and indispensable.
Same for the D elite with their smug Ivy League "meritocracy." They learned nothing from what is so well described in D. Halberstam's book on the horrible errors in Vietnam due to the certitude of what he named The Best and the Brightest.
The left version is the dogma "vanguard of the working class." My grandpa was a Wobbly and my blood boils at this notion we're too stupid to lead ourselves. In current parlance, it's the claim class is the only thing; issues important to LGBTQ or BIPOC are diversions. Most often preached by white cis male armchair theorists who've never had to fight to be recognized for what they are. And for that matter, have never held a tool in their lives. In addition to close to 30 years of blue collar experience, I'm also within both sets of letters. Contrary to the old Aristotelian either/or and to Enlightenment certainty, quantum reality has room for both/and as well as for ambiguity.
Eugene V. Debs summed it up brilliantly. "I would not lead you into paradise even if I could because if I led you in, someone else would lead you out. You must use your heads as well as your hands and get yourself out of your present condition; as it is now, the capitalists use your heads and your hands." In other words, part of that "leadership" propaganda is to convince us we're only fit to serve as hands for their superior heads.
Les, you've trained union workers. You know what is to be done.
So many of my progressive friends & family have come to the same conclusion: it is time to develop a new party. Let’s start with a platform of affordable housing, healthcare, no govt grants for corporations that do mass layoffs & stock buybacks.
The numbers are there. The real challenge is building a bond of trust between voters and the labor party candidate. This means giving them an ironclad guarantee that 1) the candidate will truly serve and represent them, and 2) they're not throwing their votes away on a "spoiler". Please look at these two articles. Therein is a strategy for certainly achieving the first goal. The second will follow when the groundswell of support has reached sufficient proportions that voters know the candidate is going to win. Here are the articles: https://johnrachel.substack.com/p/the-contract-for-american-renewal and https://johnrachel.substack.com/p/the-cfar-is-a-game-changer
As an educator, I'm sure you will recognize the power of this approach.
Les, you don't have to apologize for doing your job. We on the activist side need accurate info to argue our case effectively--and you know the econ trickle up defenders (neolibs) of the D party and their media allies aren't about to.
At 77, I'm too old to do organizing from the ground up. But as a veteran of both labor and political organizing, I could for sure serve as an advisor. If anyone thinks now is very different from then, my 1st piece of advice is to read the farmer-labor Populists, Eugene V. Debs, the C.I.O. organizers of the 1930s, and MLK.
My 2nd piece is to learn basic econ theory. The American and by extension the world econ system is justified by assertions with little empirical evidence. They're no more than a deep hatred for the New Deal and Keynesianism. Which were proven effective thus why the econ elites fear them. So we have a center-left economics that works with and for labor. The facts are on our side; working people need to hear that.
The D apologist argument about 3rd parties, that Nader cost Gore the election, is all sorts of wrong. It's just another red herring to deflect attention away from the fact the Ds haven't offered anything of substance for decades. And that they're sponsored by the same 1%er and corporate elites as the Rs.
Most grating is the D party assumption our votes belong to them. Plus that "lesser of two evils" ploy, like upper income elitist Ds believe they can get away with offering us crumbs from their table. Nader got votes because he was what we wanted to vote FOR. BTW, Dems, the non-voters are saying NO to you, too! As young supporters of Bernie said to the elite DNC: get it through your heads--you don't own us. We're outsiders, independents who might vote D if you actually field a candidate we can vote for. Same then for an avowedly pro-labor party, especially when the working class is the majority. Give us what we need to survive or we will do it ourselves.
PS: A last piece of advice that might seem irrelevant to pol and econ issues, but is even more basic. When we talk about the common good, implicitly we're invoking ethics. In addition, the question of the meaning of life. Is it merely to accumulate material goods? Granted, physical basics must take precedence. But working with and for each other is also to enable each person to find purpose. I'm saying spiritual concerns and artistic expression, what in academia are known as the humanities, are the other half of what makes us human. Let's not forget that.
My main thesis is long enough; here's a separate comment on "charismatic leader." The idea is total b.s. The implication is we lessers aren't capable.
The capitalist and bureaucratic version is exposed in those offensive and excruciatingly dull "leadership" seminars predicated on the assumption the attendees buy into the belief they're superior and indispensable.
Same for the D elite with their smug Ivy League "meritocracy." They learned nothing from what is so well described in D. Halberstam's book on the horrible errors in Vietnam due to the certitude of what he named The Best and the Brightest.
The left version is the dogma "vanguard of the working class." My grandpa was a Wobbly and my blood boils at this notion we're too stupid to lead ourselves. In current parlance, it's the claim class is the only thing; issues important to LGBTQ or BIPOC are diversions. Most often preached by white cis male armchair theorists who've never had to fight to be recognized for what they are. And for that matter, have never held a tool in their lives. In addition to close to 30 years of blue collar experience, I'm also within both sets of letters. Contrary to the old Aristotelian either/or and to Enlightenment certainty, quantum reality has room for both/and as well as for ambiguity.
Eugene V. Debs summed it up brilliantly. "I would not lead you into paradise even if I could because if I led you in, someone else would lead you out. You must use your heads as well as your hands and get yourself out of your present condition; as it is now, the capitalists use your heads and your hands." In other words, part of that "leadership" propaganda is to convince us we're only fit to serve as hands for their superior heads.
Les, you've trained union workers. You know what is to be done.
So many of my progressive friends & family have come to the same conclusion: it is time to develop a new party. Let’s start with a platform of affordable housing, healthcare, no govt grants for corporations that do mass layoffs & stock buybacks.
It is interesting how authoritarian figures and revolutionaries use the working masses against the educated elite to gain their complete control.
Yes the idolatry of the Proletariat as if hard work was some necessary religious experience !
Ever increasing home prices is the problem not jobs..
The allure of UNEARNED INCOME.
The whole political push for workers is just a smoke screen
to avoid dealing with the real estate Lords of the Lands.
Now that cartel is even hiding homes for sale.
Enough with the fake tears for the Proletariat.
FIX THE HOUSING MARKET
Did the survey address the problem of how to get the ballots counted accurately?
The numbers are there. The real challenge is building a bond of trust between voters and the labor party candidate. This means giving them an ironclad guarantee that 1) the candidate will truly serve and represent them, and 2) they're not throwing their votes away on a "spoiler". Please look at these two articles. Therein is a strategy for certainly achieving the first goal. The second will follow when the groundswell of support has reached sufficient proportions that voters know the candidate is going to win. Here are the articles: https://johnrachel.substack.com/p/the-contract-for-american-renewal and https://johnrachel.substack.com/p/the-cfar-is-a-game-changer
As an educator, I'm sure you will recognize the power of this approach.