Saturday, May 14, 2016

Alexandra Rosenmann — Chomsky: The Majority of Today's Elected Democrats Are Moderate Republicans


Thanks to Third Way New Democrats and Bill Clinton's triangulation on the advice of Dick Morris. The result was the strangulation of the "old" Democratic legacy of FDR.

AlterNet

17 comments:

Kain said...

I'd say this was definitely true 10-20 years ago, but I'm not so sure today. Bernie Sanders Democrats are no moderate Republicans, and while you can easily say Hillary was effectively a moderate Republican in 2008, she has moved to the left too.

I think Chomsky may be stuck in the past a little bit here.

Andrew Anderson said...

It's too bad FDR missed the opportunity to reduce the banks from an essential part of the economy to mere speculators who borrow short to lend long.

Instead, the New Deal added government-provided deposit insurance to the privileges* banks enjoy - a move in the wrong direction that continues today.

The issue which has swept down the centuries, and which will have to be fought sooner or later, is the people versus the banks.” Lord Acton

*such as exclusive access to inherently risk-free accounts at the cb, when all citizens should be able to have them.

Matt Franko said...

Andrew just join a credit union...

Ryan Harris said...

Hillary and Sanders are working to repair the divide between the populists and neo dems for the general election. Their anyone but Trump message should help unite Sanders followers who are dubious about Hillary, it gives them a transitory totem until they are feeling the love for Hillary.

Andrew Anderson said...

Credit unions also enjoy special privileges such as government-provided deposit insurance and exclusive access, along with the banks and other depository institutions, to inherently risk-free accounts at the central bank.

So credit unions do not solve the moral (not to mention the economic and social stability) problem of the more so-called creditworthy stealing purchasing power from the less so-called creditworthy via government privilege.

Bob said...

Hillary and Sanders are working to repair the divide between the populists and neo dems for the general election. Their anyone but Trump message should help unite Sanders followers who are dubious about Hillary, it gives them a transitory totem until they are feeling the love for Hillary.

IMO the biggest disappointment of this nomination process has been Bernie Sanders.

David said...

IMO the biggest disappointment of this nomination process has been Bernie Sanders.

So what were you looking for from him?

Bob said...

So what were you looking for from him?

At a minimum: that he cannot in good conscience endorse Hillary Clinton.

Malmo's Ghost said...

Sanders is a political wimp. Would be winning decisively against the wretched one had he an average amount of savvy political pitbull in him. I guarantee you he'll endorse Hillary.

David said...

I take Bob and Malmo's point, but I have a little different take on it. The disappointment (for progressives) happened when Elizabth Warren declined to run. She could have taken away "the woman card," hrc's one big selling point, while making some of the same arguments Bernie is. Plus, she could have credibly argued that she represented the future of the party, whereas Hillary was anchored to the past. In my view, Bernie only ran because no one else would step up to the plate. I give him credit for doing so even if he did it with one hand tied behind his back. Did anyone think he would do as well as he has? I sure didn't. If the party and the nomination process were even a little bit decent he would still have a real shot at the nomination. He chose some time ago to work within "the system" to work with the Democratic party. Maybe that was his first mistake.

David said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Tom Hickey said...

Liz Warren is no Bernie Sanders. She is not a "leftie" like Sanders. Sanders is actually an Old (FDR) Democrat. Warren is a moderate to liberal (Rockefeller) Republican.

David said...

Maybe, Tom, but she is regarded as a genuine progressive by most in the center-left cohort, mostly because she is more credible on banking and finance reform than any other dem. Not even the "serious people" can get away with saying she doesn't know what she's talking about like they tried to do with Sanders. If she were the nominee I seriously doubt if many people on the left would be comtemplating voting for Trump.

Tom Hickey said...

Warren is with Obama-Clinton on foreign policy and Obama's responsible reduction approach to the deficit

She's progressive on bank and finance regulation, and on social values.

Malmo's Ghost said...

Tom,

You think Sanders will endorse Hillary?

Tom Hickey said...

No idea, but Bernie is conscious that he is the focus of a movement that did not begin with him and will not end with him. I think that is likely to be uppermost in his mind in making such decisions.

How that will go, I don't know. If think that for Bernie to endorse Hillary strongly enough to send supporters her way there would have to be a deal that he thought was beneficial to the cause.

I am somewhat doubtful that Hillary would make such a deal, but who knows. If she wins the nomination and Trump is breathing down her neck, then anything is possible.

Bob said...

David,

Sanders has indicated that he would support the winner, and stresses the need for unity. He might also use the 'lesser of two evils' rationale. It's not too late for him to take a principled stand, but I have little hope that he will. I'd like to see him wring concessions (symbolic of course) out of the Clinton camp.