Progressives (Liberals)

… And in after a term or two, with progressives and moderates cooperating to achieve legislative accomplishments and return comity, ethics, and a unifying message to the government, the whole goddamned country will be a lot more receptive to progressive solutions.

The trouble with having so many candidates vying for the office is that the real sentiments of the voters gets diluted. The green votes gets split between say, Inslee and Hickenlooper. Champions of ethnic diversity split between Harris, Castro, and Booker. Centrists have Biden or O'Rourke. Feminists might choose between Gillibrand, Gabbard, Warren, and Klobuchar. The left will have a slew of progressives to choose between. We've got to be ready to accept that the eventual winner may not be our chosen candidate, even if the numbers suggest that our candidate's values are well represented among the electorate.

I really hate the way we select our candidates — or, more accurately, the way the primaries can skew the results. But ultimately the party and the Congress are more important than the fate of individual candidates.

So far there is little evidence that will occur.

This, of course is a fairly direct reflection of the nonsensical group identities & values that Democrats have fostered.

You sound a lot like Lenin here.

During the lifetime of great revolutionaries, the oppressing classes constantly hounded them, received their theories with the most savage malice, the most furious hatred and the most unscrupulous campaigns of lies and slander. After their death, attempts are made to convert them into harmless icons, to canonize them, so to say, and to hallow their names to a certain extent for the “consolation” of the oppressed classes and with the object of duping the latter, while at the same time robbing the revolutionary theory of its substance, blunting its revolutionary edge and vulgarizing it.

Unity is a great thing and a great slogan. But what the workers’ cause needs is the unity of Marxists, not unity between Marxists, and opponents and distorters of Marxism.

We are not utopians, we do not “dream” of dispensing at once with all administration, with all subordination. These anarchist dreams, based upon incomprehension of the tasks of the proletarian dictatorship, are totally alien to Marxism, and, as a matter of fact, serve only to postpone the socialist revolution until people are different. No, we want the socialist revolution with people as they are now, with people who cannot dispense with subordination, control, and "foremen and accountants".

The intellectual forces of the workers and peasants are growing and getting stronger in their fight to overthrow the bourgeoisie and their accomplices, the educated classes, the lackeys of capital, who consider themselves the brains of the nation. In fact they are not its brains but its ****.

In the primaries or in the general?

Unity is a great thing and a great slogan. But what the workers’ cause needs is the unity of Marxists, not unity between Marxists, and opponents and distorters of Marxism.

We are not utopians, we do not “dream” of dispensing at once with all administration, with all subordination. These anarchist dreams, based upon incomprehension of the tasks of the proletarian dictatorship, are totally alien to Marxism, and, as a matter of fact, serve only to postpone the socialist revolution until people are different. No, we want the socialist revolution with people as they are now, with people who cannot dispense with subordination, control, and "foremen and accountants".

The intellectual forces of the workers and peasants are growing and getting stronger in their fight to overthrow the bourgeoisie and their accomplices, the educated classes, the lackeys of capital, who consider themselves the brains of the nation. In fact they are not its brains but its ****.

I do find it amazing...so soon after...quickly adopting the failed ideas of their predecessors.

Again, if you'd like to have a careful discussion on whether advocacy and propaganda or identical or not, and why not, let me know.

In many ways I believe the political situation of the democrats now is similar, or at least analogous to that of Republicans in 2015.

I do find it amazing that, so soon after the end of the ghastly 20th century , the authoritarian, would be perfecters of humanity are so q1uickly adopting the failed ideas of their predecessors.

I hope you understand that I posted some selections from Lenin as a contrast to my rather milquetoast suggestion that Democrats might want to consider the importance of having a Democratic administration as opposed to exclusively electing an ideologically pure individual as president. I rather doubt that Lenin would approve. Nor have I ever suggested enforcing Democratic unity with "murderous intensity".

the most useful advocacy

He wasn't trying to "harm Israel"

Netanyahu already has.

I meant useful in the context of offering a reasoned and reasonable argument for a particular position

based on the facts that attend it.

i.e. an appeal to the intelligence and best qualities of the recipients

Well I suggested you sounded "more than a bit like Lenin", and you did as evidenced by the selection you quoted here.

It Isn’t Complicated: Trump Encourages Violence
He doesn’t deserve blame for any specific attack. He does deserve blame for the increase in white-nationalist violence.

I can tell you I have the support of the police, the support of the military, the support of the Bikers for Trump. I have the tough people, but they don’t play it tough — until they go to a certain point, and then it would be very bad, very bad.”