[Sosfbay-discuss] PDA Cooption by DLC Dems & George Soros

[JamBoi]

From:  Howie Hawkins
Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2007 12:33 AM
Subject: [usgp-media] Re: [usgp-dx] Progressives find
ways to work with the Dem establishment(In These
Times) 

The lack of historical perspective in this article is
appalling. These academics (Heaney, Rojas, and
Domhoff) and talking heads (Flanders) say it is "new"
for progressive movement activists to engage in
electoral politics inside the Democratic Party.

What about the fusionists in the populist movement,
the "non-partisan" wing of the socialist movement, the
labor movement (especially after 1936), and the death
of the civil rights and anti-war movements in
Democratic Party after 1968?

Domhoff has been writing about this strategy in books
since at least 1973.
It's not new.

It's got worse. There was a time during the Rainbow
Coalition when "inside/outside" was coined and meant
running independent candidates when the Democratic
candidate wasn't progressive. In practice, that always
ended up inside, because the activists tended to want
to ingratiate themselves with the Democratic machine
in order to be "players" and supporting independents
would kill that goal.

Now for PDA, "inside/outside" means inside support for
Democratic candidates and outside lobbying of
Democratic officeholders. Pathetic.

Fletcher is a "Maoist" from the Freedom Road Socialist
Organization, which like most ultra-left post-SDS
groups became pedestrian liberals when the 60s
movements receded. They entered the Democrats with the
Jackson campaign in 1984. As one of them (Barry
Weisberg of the Communist Labor Party) who became paid
staff for Harold Washington, then Jesse Jackson, then
Marion Barry told me, "I'm tired of losing." To me,
looking real sharp in his expensive suit, he seemed
very happy to be getting paid very well as a campaign
consultant.

It's a shame that Scott got only one line in this
story. But In These Times, a house organ for
"progressive" Democrats, is "fair and balanced" for
the
Democrats like Fox is "fair and balanced" for the
Republicans.

A note on the funding question: A consortium of
super-rich liberals -- George Soros, Peter Lewis, and
others -- pledged in 2005 to committ $100 million to
the liberal Democratic NGO infrastructure over the
next 15 years. The labor unions spent $8-12 billion on
the Democrats between 1980 and 2004 and plan to spend
even more in the future.

We're not going to get funded on that scale. But with
a few million dollars a year from a few hundred
thousand supporters, I think we could change the
politics of the country. Millions of people are sick
of the Democrats
consistently caving in to the corporate power
structure, like they did again this week on the war
supplemental.

-- Howie Hawkins, Syracuse NY

Subject: Article: Progressives find ways to work with
the Dem establishment(In These Times)
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2007 13:01:01 -0400

George DeCarlo wrote:
Thank you Howie!  In New Jersey we have a member, Bob
Cartwright, who writes such analyses each time
Democratic front pieces and organizations are
presented.  As for Soros mentioned below, I had
written about this huckster even admired by some
Greens for his donations.  They did not think to do
some research and see what the proportion was to his
wealth.

I had written this message in the past for the Soros
admirers (lovers?):

Since there seems to be a fascination within the
progressive community about people such as Soros and
others and how much some of these wealthiest people
have given from their personal funds (theft), below
are some references:

http://www.forbes.com/home/2003/09/17/rich400land.html
	
#28 Soros, George: 7.0 billion 73, Bedford , NY hedge
funds

**  If Soros gave 15.5 million, that is only .0022% of
his personal wealth.  Someone making $30,000 a year
would match this percentage of their wealth by giving
$66.00 as a percentage of their yearly income.  This
is not even enough for a yearly deduction for charity.
 Or, let's say they have personal wealth with a house
completely paid for of $300,000 total.  Then the
mythical person would match Soros' contribution by
giving $660.00.  It seems that Soros needs to give a
little more to impress.

Additionally, Soros and others have ties which do
bind:

http://www.questionsquestions.net/

http://www.questionsquestions.net/gatekeepers.html

--

George DeCarlo, CH 

At 11:00 AM 5/23/2007 -0700, Scott McLarty wrote:
>(The main reason I'm forwarding this article is
>because I have short quote in it that's critical
>of MoveOn, PDA, & the Democratic Party.  But the
>article also shows that Greens need to be, or
>need to get to, the same level of organization &
>fundraising as these groups, or they'll advance
>far ahead of us in effectiveness. -- Scott)
>
>Dancing Into the Majority
>
>Once alienated, grassroots activists are finding
>ways to work with the Democratic Party
>establishment
>
>By Adam Doster
>In These Times, May 23, 2007
>http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/3201/dancing_into_the_majority/
>
>
>When Michael Heaney served as a special guest to
>the Brookings Institution’s Governance Studies
>Program in the fall of 2002, he couldn’t ignore
>the growing anxiety surrounding the invasion of
>Iraq. After marching to the White House with a
>local CodePink chapter and attending larger
>rallies in D.C. that year, the budding political
>scientist—now an assistant professor at the
>University of Florida—took an interest in the
>makeup of the antiwar movement. “I just started
>noticing all of the organizational diversity of
>people there,” he says, “and I got very
>interested in understanding the differences
>between these organizations, how they mobilize
>people, what they wanted and how they framed
>their arguments.”
>
>This curiosity led him to team up with Indiana
>University sociologist Fabio Rojas, and together
>they coined the term “Party in the Street” to
>describe a “set of individuals and organizations
>that are both part of a grassroots social
>movement and that identify and work with a
>political party.”
>
>Their research, to be published in July in
>American Politics Research, found that many
>left-leaning Americans navigate between social
>movements and the Democratic Party. In surveys
>distributed at large rallies and conventions in
>2004 and 2005, Heaney and Rojas discovered that a
>plurality of antiwar activists identified as
>Democrats (40 percent) or articulated some
>willingness to work with or vote for the party
>(39 percent). On the other hand, 20 percent of
>participants identified as members of a third
>party, which implies that they think organizing
>under the Democratic tent is counterproductive.
>>From this data, Heaney and Rojas conclude that
>many social movement activists are beginning to
>embrace the opportunities the Democratic Party
>provides in order to achieve their loftier
>movement goals.
>
>Radio host Laura Flanders, who explores
>grassroots insurgencies across the country in her
>new book Blue Grit: True Democrats Take Back
>Politics from the Politicians (excerpted on page
>18), recognizes this phenomenon as well.
>“Organizations that for years would have defined
>themselves as movement groups that eschewed
>electoral politics and never expected to get
>anything from politicians are deciding to get
>involved,” she says.
>
>
>Swelling the ranks
>
>Numerous factors contribute to the recent surge
>in grassroots political organizing, but popular
>frustration with the Bush administration is
>central. Heaney points to “a deep dissatisfaction
>with the direction of our country, especially
>with the way President Bush responded to 9/11 and
>the way that the Iraq war [has gone] and all the
>mistakes that were made and lies that were told.”
>The political momentum created by war protesters
>also helps activate people to fight other
>injustices perpetuated by Bush and his Republican
>cohorts, as shown by the immigrant-rights marches
>held in cities across the country.
>
>But it’s not only anger with Bush that is causing
>movement-partisan organizations to expand.
>Lackluster leadership from establishment
>Democrats, many of whom remain timid on economic
>and social issues and hawkish on the war, has
>galvanized disillusioned Democrats and outside
>activists alike to seek another political path.
>
>“We’ve learned from issue after issue, going back
>to the Clinton era and earlier, that electing
>Democrats is just not enough to move our society
>forward,” says Jeff Cohen, founder of Fairness
>and Accuracy In Reporting and a media adviser to
>the Progressive Democrats of America (PDA), a
>progressive political organization and a
>grassroots PAC operating inside the Democratic
>Party. “You need to elect Democrats with backbone
>and with principles.”
>
>Indeed, more and more progressives who refused to
>support spineless Democrats and instead backed
>unsuccessful third-party candidates have come to
>understand the pragmatic necessity of working
>within the Democratic Party.
>
>In an electoral system based on winning a
>plurality of votes, rather than some form of
>proportional representation, Democrats hold a
>striking advantage over outside challengers. “In
>a study of the percentage of Socialist or Social
>Democratic party members in national legislatures
>across the world, only South Africa had
>less—zero—than the two who made it to the [U.S.]
>House of Representatives a few times in the first
>quarter of the twentieth century,” G. William
>Domhoff, a sociologist at the University of
>California, Santa Cruz, notes on his website.
>“More leftists were elected to Congress in the
>’30s and early ’40s as Democrats 
 than were ever
>earlier elected as socialists.” The only way for
>progressives to beat Democrats, then, is to join
>them.
>
>
>PDA’s innovative approach
>
>That’s the goal of PDA, perhaps the national
>organization that most closely reflects the model
>posited by Heaney and Rojas. Founded in Roxbury,
>Mass., during the 2004 Democratic National
>Convention—primarily by delegates and activists
>from the campaigns of Howard Dean and Rep. Dennis
>Kucinich (D-Ohio)—PDA is attempting to carve out
>a space for progressives in the Democratic Party.
>
>
>The members of this grassroots association are
>going about that task using a strategy they call
>“Inside/Outside,” meaning PDA runs candidates and
>lobbies members inside the Democratic Party while
>allying themselves outside the electoral arena
>with organizations that work to promote its five
>stated priorities: ending the Iraq war, universal
>health care, fair and clean elections, economic
>justice and environmental sustainability.
>
>“I see Inside/Outside as absolutely essential,”
>says Bill Honigman, PDA’s California state
>coordinator. “There are going to be times when
>the party needs to be shook up a little, and the
>only way to do that is from the outside. By the
>same token, you can’t do it all from the outside.
>You have to be involved in the party to change
>things when it’s going the wrong way.”
>
>Dean’s influence on PDA’s structure is hard to
>ignore. At the local level, PDA hopes to set up
>individual chapters in all 435 congressional
>districts. This tactic is similar to the “50
>State Strategy” Dean has employed as DNC
>chairman, which focuses on organizing Democrats
>in every voting precinct at all levels of
>government. So far, PDA National Director Tim
>Carpenter says that the group has established
>chapters in 120 districts, which he describes as
>at least “five folks coming together, pulling
>papers and meeting at least once a month.” As in
>all substantial bottom-up organizing, their
>progress is slow, as evidenced by the dearth of
>local councils in less populated states like
>Delaware and Wyoming. But residents elsewhere are
>expressing great interest. Florida has 13
>chapters and California now boasts 23 locals
>along with close allies in the state assembly’s
>Progressive Caucus.
>
>PDA also follows the fundraising model of the
>2004 Dean campaign, relying almost entirely on
>sustainer donations that average $22 a month.
>These local chapters are where the action occurs,
>allowing PDA to organize in support of
>congressional actions or in response to
>lackluster representation. “We’re trying to
>develop the grassroots so that we build up all of
>our communities and not just focus on ones that
>classify as swing districts,” says Honigman.
>
>In many ways, PDA has assumed the role of a party
>within a party by coordinating collective efforts
>of like-minded activists while at the same time
>running or endorsing candidates in certain
>circumstances. However, unlike the national
>Democratic Party, the goal is not nominal
>electoral majorities; PDA aims to transform the
>party into one dominated by progressive
>politicians, not corporate interests.
>
>Through its willingness to apply more public
>forms of pressure like press conferences and
>teach-ins, PDA has earned national recognition.
>It was one of the first groups to publicize the
>infamous Downing Street Memo, which exposed
>another layer of White House deception in the
>run-up to the war, and it rallied activists
>around Ohio’s voting irregularities in 2004.
>Members also pushed in early 2007 for a
>congressional debate on a fully funded withdrawal
>of all troops and military contractors from Iraq.
>
>
>On the inside, PDA was active this past election
>season in various Democratic campaigns, including
>John Hall’s victory in New York’s 19th District.
>The local PDA chapter raised awareness of John
>Hall’s progressivism by organizing events
>throughout northern Westchester County. Hall’s
>press secretary Tom Staudter later credited PDA
>with generating vital momentum. While other
>PDA-endorsed candidates were not as successful,
>such as Christine Cegelis in Illinois’ 6th
>District (who lost the Democratic primary by four
>percentage points to Tammy Duckworth, the
>favorite of the party establishment), PDA
>organizers think their local electoral organizing
>is laying the groundwork for sustainable
>influence down the road. “Chapters were organized
>prior to the campaign,” says Carpenter, “they
>endorsed that candidate and at the end of that
>race they were stronger and more chapters came
>out of them.”
>
>
>Other movement organizing
>
>PDA is not alone in its efforts. A variety of
>national organizations are simultaneously
>engaging in electoral work and standard movement
>organizing.
>
>One prominent group is CodePink, the feminist
>antiwar group that was founded in 2002. Named
>with the Department of Homeland Security’s
>color-coded alert system in mind, CodePink is
>known for its non-violent direct action
>campaigns. For example, in November 2002,
>CodePink members began a four-month vigil in
>front of the White House to oppose the Iraq
>invasion and have since repeatedly protested at
>high-profile political hearings and fundraisers.
>
>But a focus on local organizing and building
>institutional movements links CodePink with
>groups like PDA. In four years, CodePink has
>established more than 250 local chapters, each of
>which runs autonomous campaigns and actions in
>their own communities while receiving ideas and
>assistance from the national unit. These
>campaigns include lobbying members of Congress
>and coordinating diplomatic visits, such as a
>program that sent a delegation of 15 women to
>Iraq to meet with local women and hear their
>stories.
>
>“There is this Beltway culture,” says Dana
>Balicki, CodePink’s media coordinator. “And we
>are hammering at it to make sure there’s a real
>element of public discourse.”
>
>Another prime example is the fledging Aurora
>Project, spearheaded by Bill Fletcher, Jr.,
>founder of the Black Radical Congress and a Belle
>Zeller Visiting Professor at Brooklyn College,
>City University of New York. Fletcher looks to
>Jesse Jackson’s campaigns for president in 1984
>and 1988 as models. Jackson and his allies,
>Fletcher says, promoted “a vision of a non-party
>political organization that could operate inside
>and outside the Democratic Party and had a very
>broad tent within which progressive social
>movements could find a place but where people of
>color did not get lost.” Jackson’s coalition took
>a less democratic shape than originally hoped,
>but for many of those involved, the potential of
>the model remains.
>
>Like PDA, Aurora Project organizers hope to build
>local electoral organizations that are networked
>nationally. However, unlike many other movement
>organizations, issues involving race and gender
>factor prominently into the Aurora Project
>platform.
>
>“Organizations, given the history of the United
>States, do not have the option of taking a pass
>on race if they want to build a majoritarian
>movement,” says Fletcher. “Attempting to build a
>bloc that avoids it invariably ends up failing or
>stumbling at the minimum.” Last December in
>Washington, D.C., more than 50 experienced
>activists met to discuss strategy at the Aurora
>Project’s founding meeting. Organizers are
>currently traveling around the country talking
>with local leaders about their plans, which,
>according to Fletcher, have been met with
>enthusiasm.
>
>Even MoveOn, an organization whose leadership
>focuses more on national issue advocacy than
>organizing the grassroots, has spawned 200 active
>local chapters through its electoral fieldwork
>and Internet technology. Similar to PDA, these
>autonomous groups hold public educational events
>and participate in national advocacy campaigns
>while fostering relationships with their
>congressional representatives, bridging their
>outside activity with electoral organizing.
>
>“A number of members of Congress have met with
>our [local councils] because it’s clear that
>these are some of the people who are influential
>in the district,” says Eli Pariser, executive
>director of MoveOn. “It’s very exciting to start
>to see influences in engaged citizens rather than
>the local crew of lobbyists.”
>
>
>The path ahead
>
>The Party in the Street is music to the ears of
>lefty lawmakers, many of whom now hold key
>committee and subcommittee chairmanships but have
>not had an organized, national grassroots arm
>backing their congressional battles for quite
>some time.
>
>Relationships between members of the
>Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC) and
>movement-partisan activists are quickly
>developing and provide mutual benefits. For
>example, when a legislator proposes a favorable
>new bill, organizers immediately contact their
>local representatives to seek out co-sponsors.
>And the broad networking ability of these groups
>raises awareness about issues for which
>progressive legislators are fighting. “I think
>that when they get their membership to start
>sending emails, it puts on the radar screen
>issues that many members might otherwise not be
>thinking of,” says Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.),
>who founded the CPC while a member of the House.
>
>But as Sanders’ insistence on running as an
>independent suggests, the Party in the Street
>model presents serious trade-offs for its
>members. “Their ties to the Democratic Party are
>both their greatest strength and their greatest
>weakness,” says Heaney. While aligning closely
>with Democrats allows for easier recruitment of
>politically socialized members and access to
>Washington leadership, groups can grow
>disconnected from their membership or experience
>co-optation.
>
>Navigating that liminal space could be the
>largest obstacle for the Party in the Street’s
>success. Members of social movements often
>advocate morally principled but legislatively
>impractical causes while Democrats seek sound
>political victories, sometimes undermining
>justice in the name of compromise. As Heaney
>notes, people balancing between the movement and
>the party—which don’t always see eye to eye—are
>in a precarious position. “There is that force in
>the party which is trying to pull people out of
>the social movement and there is a force in the
>social movement that’s trying to pull people out
>of the party,” says Heaney. “In a sense, they are
>not two institutions that go together real
>easily.”
>
>This fear was dramatized in March when some in
>the anti-war movement lambasted MoveOn for its
>actions on the Iraq Accountability Act. Polling
>its members, MoveOn asked if the organization
>should back Pelosi’s phased troop withdrawal
>plan, which was up for a congressional vote. In
>doing so, they ignored a bill sponsored by Rep.
>Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), which was never brought
>to the floor for a vote, but that called for
>immediate troop withdrawal. Other anti-war
>groups, such as United for Peace and Justice, and
>Code-Pink, saw this sole focus on Pelosi’s bill
>as a compromised one—one that was more in sync
>with the will of the newly accessible
>Congressional leadership rather than the country
>at large.
>
>“There is a danger that you can be so supportive
>[of Democrats] that you no longer have a balanced
>view of what’s really happening,” Balicki says.
>“If you get too far inside the Beltway, you can
>be sucked right in.”
>
>There’s also a danger of alienating potential
>allies, especially members of third parties who
>are skeptical of Democratic partisan motives.
>“The problem with PDA and MoveOn and others,”
>says Scott McLarty, media coordinator for the
>Green Party of the United States, “is that by
>focusing on the rehabilitation of the Democratic
>Party, which I think is a hopeless prospect, they
>don’t allow for the possibility of a new kind of
>politics.”
>
>But if members of organizations like PDA can
>master that balancing act, the model could
>succeed in building a progressive majority in the
>United States. One unlikely inspiration could be
>the activists who occupy a similar, albeit more
>established, organizational space on the right.
>Groups like the Christian Coalition have
>cultivated a regimented mass organization focused
>on local organizing that has successfully pushed
>their principal issues to the forefront of the
>GOP agenda while remaining independent of the
>party. To emulate that success, progressives must
>remember that Democratic electoral victories are
>not ends unto themselves; only through a focus on
>sustained, local mobilization and leadership
>development can progressives begin to shift away
>from issues-based pressure groups that have
>dominated left politics since the ‘70’s.
>
>Democratic primaries could provide a natural
>arena for the Party in the Street to assert its
>influence. “By putting your maximum program out
>there and challenging in primaries,” says
>Domhoff, “you have a chance to reach the general
>public.”
>
>But as Flanders notes, organizations like PDA
>must also “work outside of its comfort zone.”
>It’s a sentiment shared by Fletcher, who notes “a
>recurring problem in progressive circles, where
>they come to be dominated by what can best be
>described as white economic populists. But when
>it comes to issues of race and gender, there’s a
>soft peddling in the way of bringing us all
>together.”
>
>Constructing a broader and stronger progressive
>tent includes establishing vibrant chapters in
>communities of color and in historically
>Republican districts, two constituencies often
>taken for granted or ignored by national
>Democrats. Carpenter was enthusiastic about
>inroads PDA has made in “red districts,” but
>expressed pessimism about progress in heavily
>black or Latino locales, something he says PDA is
>actively addressing through its Diversity Caucus
>and by assembling a racially diverse executive
>board.
>
>The kids can’t be ignored, either. As Heaney and
>Rojas document, the Party in the Street “is
>composed mainly of the young (18 to 27) and the
>old (46 to 67), with relatively fewer
>participants outside these ranges.” Energetic
>young folks are playing a crucial role
>organizationally and at the polls, meaning that
>special attention should be paid to youth
>recruitment and leadership training.
>
>Perhaps most important, movement-partisans must
>support and run candidates with bold policy
>initiatives that will excite an electorate that’s
>increasingly cynical about government. And
>intra-party debate should be encouraged. As
>MoveOn’s Pariser puts it, “A diversity of
>opinions is a strength.” But only by formulating
>a strong progressive platform that addresses the
>concerns of middle- and working-class Americans
>can movement-partisans avoid political obscurity
>and shift the Democratic Party to the left.
>
>Groups like PDA cannot yet contend with the
>influence of more established, corporate-friendly
>bodies like the Democratic Leadership Council.
>But if organizers follow the model they have
>devised and remain open to self-criticism, the
>Party in the Street might give a lot of
>progressives reason to dance. “Every great social
>movement begins in the street,” says Carpenter.
>“But it ultimately ends in the halls of
>Congress.”
>

___________________

JamBoi: Jammy, The Sacred Cow Slayer
The Green Parties' #1 Blogger
http://dailyJam.blogspot.com

"To the brave belong all things"
Celt's invading Etrusca reply to nervous Romans around 400BC

"Live humbly, laugh often and love unconditionally" (anon)


 
____________________________________________________________________________________
Expecting? Get great news right away with email Auto-Check. 
Try the Yahoo! Mail Beta.
http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta/newmail_tools.html