I left the national DP in 1994 when Clinton went for NAFTA. I left the DFL about 2 years later and joined the Greens.
A basic differenct between the DFL and the GP: the GP does not take PAC money. It does not want to be or to seem indebted to corporations, developers, big boxes, chains, the highway lobby, union busters - or even to unions and "good" PACs. It solicits small contributions from hundreds/thousands of people; no one person or small circle of Greens can force the GP to favoritism or cronyism. Rejecting PACs tends to make the GP a long-term friend of the people, small business, co-ops etc and enemy of corporations, big boxes, and the overprivileged top .1 percent. We figure the latter can fend for themselves with no help from us; and the rest of us need to have laws written and enforced to protect us from them (eg a size cap to keep out WalMart and ilk). Should a GP officer or elected official renege, the membership of the GP is quick to begin the process of removing them. The DFL does take PAC money, and large contributions from wealthy individuals and families. It makes is difficult for the DFL to bite the hand that feeds it. If it talks or acts progressive, the rich contributors leave, and finance an opponent in the next election - as the DFL well knows, and so it does as little progressive as possible. The most important part of the population for it is the top 2 percent, as the top .1 with the RP. The GP aims at serving the bottom 98 percent. Because it is not in hock to the top small percent, it is free to do so. He who pays the piper calls the tune. Were the DFL to ban PAC money and large private contributions, it might have a chance to become progressive - to serve the bottom 98% and let the RP serve the top 2% If the DFL does not ban PAC money, it cannot climb out of its losing rut, or reclaim its more progressive past. If so, real progressives are invited to leave, and join the GP. --David Shove Roseville On Wed, 23 Nov 2005, Heidi Quezada wrote: > Well, I will be the second to express my disgust. Take this quote from Matt > Taibbi explaining why he is disenchanted by the Democratic Party. It > explains exactly how I feel (and a majority of 'progressives' in > Minneapolis, I think). > > > > > "What [the Democratic Party] offers is series of positions of varying > > reasonableness on the same narrow issues that have been sold to voters as > > the sum total of 'politics' for the last twenty or thirty or forty years: > > tax policy, balanced budgets, educational spending. None of the proposals > > are ever fundamental changes....The candidates therefore become buffoons > > straight out of Voltaire: crusaders for change, campaigning on a platform of > > minor improvements to this best of all possible worlds" (Spanking the > > Donkey. The New York Press, 2005). > > > > This is why we have a problem nationally with winning elections and this > > is why we have the problems in Minneapolis with having our DFL candidates de > > facto republicans (We don't have a problem with Democrats winning because > > like Denny pointed out, they all call themselves Democrats). This is why the > > Republicans, nationally and locally, call the shots. Our elected Democrats > > meanwhile, sit back, comfortable in their knowledge that if they are from > > Minneapolis, they know they will be re-elected if they vote the right way > > and keep DFL after their name, providing no real leadership, no real reform, > > no real solutions*. But rather, reacting to the measures that the > > Republicans put forward with conviction and passion (however misplaced, > > IMHO) > > > > So, what to do....Well, we have some great new leadership in the Minnesota > > DFL and some candidates for local office that wish to change the DFL from > > within (rather than chucking it and heading for the Greens). But it isn't > > enough just to vote. The Stone/Kummer race was a perfect example. If all of > > us interested in politics vote the way of reform, it isn't enough. We have > > to help get others involved. Organize people to their participate in their > > caucuses, the primary and the general. > > > > I love what the DFL party stands for, but it doesn't really seem to be > > "standing" for those things as much as kinda wobbling. I have hope for > > change, whereas others have already turned Green. But maybe if we can turn > > this around here, we can stop the hemorrhage of progressives to the Green > > Party and give them a reason to stay and also to return. > > > > *Note: There are, of course, exceptions...you know who you are. > > > > Heidi Quezada > > Standish > > > > > > > REMINDERS: > 1. Be civil! Please read the NEW RULES at http://www.e-democracy.org/rules. > If you think a member is in violation, contact the list manager at [EMAIL > PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. > > 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. > > For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html > For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract > ________________________________ > > Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn > E-Democracy > Post messages to: mailto:[email protected] > Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls > REMINDERS: 1. Be civil! Please read the NEW RULES at http://www.e-democracy.org/rules. If you think a member is in violation, contact the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[email protected] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
