Posts: 75
Threads: 0
Joined: Jun 2016
There is a lot of stuff teetering. Just hanging there, waiting for a good breeze to push it over.
- Middle East and North Africa, now an vast wasteland. Rampant poverty and dislocation. Broken governments and government by murder gangs and non-state actors. The viable parties (Egypt, Turkey, Iran and Saudi Arabia et al) suffer as well with rising debt, refugee problems and lock tight dictatorships. Israel grows in its boldness and the proposed one state solution is a powder keg both internally and with a host of non-state actors willing to act.
- Afghanistan, Pakistan, India and Burma. Racial/religious/cultural tensions on the rise and if the past is any indication, issues in this region have the capability of going from 0 indicator to full blown crisis at light speed.
- North Korea
- The "Far East" China's issues seem to be compounding at an alarming rate. Many of its problems are of it's own creation (viral outbreaks reeducation camps for Muslims, the nine dash line, rampant spying exposed) and some brought on my the outside (Taiwan, push back on trade from the US, African states and India).
- Pacific island nations and the land down under are feeling the impact of climate change with island nations actually disappearing, fires and a rise is racial/nationalistic tensions.
- Europe and Great Britain seeing a rise in right-wing nationalism and a simultaneous drop in enthusiasm from left wing proponents. Russia looms larger and larger particularly for former East Bloc states all the while NATO dithers about.
- Africa. Africa is just fucked. Aside from Kenya, Tanzania and Ethiopia, the entire continent is composed of failed states, violent non-state actors, famine, disease and failed economies.
The only thing it doesn't have right now is the Corona Virus. Yet.
- The Americas are in a lot worse shape than we choose to recognize. Central America with its drug cartels, corrupt government, refugee problems and failed or failing states have a huge price tag attached whether white middle class Americans choose to recognize it or not. Chickens coming home to roost.
There is perfect storm material out there boiling around to create a crisis crescendo at any given moment. All of them COULD precipitate a major war, or collection of wars. All of them could spell huge economic pain with or without a major war. I will not sacrifice the goat and read the entrails but only say that it would not surprise me in the slightest should I rise tomorrow to hear the crisis crescendo(s) were upon us.
There are a few things I believe will figure prominently into the hindsight on this turning.
-- Rise of non-state actors and global affinity groups as key influences in the course of events.
-- Shrinking significance of the nation state in determining the course of events and eventual outcomes.
-- Increasing inability of the nation state model to function at all.
-- The pervasive impact of technology on human perception and reason.
When the shit goes down, I think it will be fast and furious. I somehow, against reason, feel it will be over as fast as it starts. Not a 15 year protracted engagement, but a few short and REALLY EXCITING TO THE POINT OF TERROR YEARS.
When the smoke clears I think a few things will be completely absent. Baby Boomer influence, the war over abortion and the age of technology will be among them. In their place I see clear, pragmatic, secular models that make the best of a bad situation for the most people possible. It wont be called socialism either. It will be called getting the job done.
There was never any good old days
They are today, they are tomorrow
It's a stupid thing we say
Cursing tomorrow with sorrow
-- Eugene Hutz
Posts: 683
Threads: 41
Joined: May 2016
(02-11-2020, 11:49 AM)David Horn Wrote: (02-10-2020, 04:46 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: (02-10-2020, 03:14 PM)David Horn Wrote: The worst part is: extreme rightwing nationalism is getting to be a worldwide phenomenon. The center stopped holding sometime ago. That's certainly bad, in and of itself, but it may be a precursor to a more universal solution. Brexit shows all the signs of going poorly, Trump is now irritating even many of the faithful. The Orbans, Dutertes of the world are slowly dragging their countries into messes they can't remedy using national assets. So a good solid economic collapse could pull all this down without violence. Any ideas on how that might happen?
Sanders or Warren getting elected would certainly give us a "good solid economic collapse". Whether that would end without violence is another matter.
There are too many issues hanging fire for either Liz or Bernie to do more than steer the ship of state to the left. None of the massive programs has a chance of being implemented soon, though all would be beneficial for the country. Cutting healthcare costs, raising taxes on the rich and making life more affordable for the 90% who need real raises and programs to help them live in the modern world will happen, eventually. Eventually isn't now.
We've lived in the New Gilded Age long enough, but an exit -- any exit -- will be tedious. The PTB will throw down every possible roadblock. The political instructions are tilted right by Constitutional design. Barring a total collapse that forces a real solution, the gains will clawed out bit by bit.
You mean that it will take as big an economic fallout as the Great Depression in order to get such beneficial actions done?
Posts: 683
Threads: 41
Joined: May 2016
(02-11-2020, 02:04 PM)Skabungus Wrote: There is a lot of stuff teetering. Just hanging there, waiting for a good breeze to push it over.
- Middle East and North Africa, now an vast wasteland. Rampant poverty and dislocation. Broken governments and government by murder gangs and non-state actors. The viable parties (Egypt, Turkey, Iran and Saudi Arabia et al) suffer as well with rising debt, refugee problems and lock tight dictatorships. Israel grows in its boldness and the proposed one state solution is a powder keg both internally and with a host of non-state actors willing to act.
- Afghanistan, Pakistan, India and Burma. Racial/religious/cultural tensions on the rise and if the past is any indication, issues in this region have the capability of going from 0 indicator to full blown crisis at light speed.
- North Korea
- The "Far East" China's issues seem to be compounding at an alarming rate. Many of its problems are of it's own creation (viral outbreaks reeducation camps for Muslims, the nine dash line, rampant spying exposed) and some brought on my the outside (Taiwan, push back on trade from the US, African states and India).
- Pacific island nations and the land down under are feeling the impact of climate change with island nations actually disappearing, fires and a rise is racial/nationalistic tensions.
- Europe and Great Britain seeing a rise in right-wing nationalism and a simultaneous drop in enthusiasm from left wing proponents. Russia looms larger and larger particularly for former East Bloc states all the while NATO dithers about.
- Africa. Africa is just fucked. Aside from Kenya, Tanzania and Ethiopia, the entire continent is composed of failed states, violent non-state actors, famine, disease and failed economies.
The only thing it doesn't have right now is the Corona Virus. Yet.
- The Americas are in a lot worse shape than we choose to recognize. Central America with its drug cartels, corrupt government, refugee problems and failed or failing states have a huge price tag attached whether white middle class Americans choose to recognize it or not. Chickens coming home to roost.
There is perfect storm material out there boiling around to create a crisis crescendo at any given moment. All of them COULD precipitate a major war, or collection of wars. All of them could spell huge economic pain with or without a major war. I will not sacrifice the goat and read the entrails but only say that it would not surprise me in the slightest should I rise tomorrow to hear the crisis crescendo(s) were upon us.
There are a few things I believe will figure prominently into the hindsight on this turning.
-- Rise of non-state actors and global affinity groups as key influences in the course of events.
-- Shrinking significance of the nation state in determining the course of events and eventual outcomes.
-- Increasing inability of the nation state model to function at all.
-- The pervasive impact of technology on human perception and reason.
When the shit goes down, I think it will be fast and furious. I somehow, against reason, feel it will be over as fast as it starts. Not a 15 year protracted engagement, but a few short and REALLY EXCITING TO THE POINT OF TERROR YEARS.
When the smoke clears I think a few things will be completely absent. Baby Boomer influence, the war over abortion and the age of technology will be among them. In their place I see clear, pragmatic, secular models that make the best of a bad situation for the most people possible. It wont be called socialism either. It will be called getting the job done.
Regarding your next to last paragraph, are you suggestion that said action, whatever it may be, will be akin to the Spanish-American war in that it was over and done with within the same year? Our resident astrologer has suggested that the smelly brown stuff will hit the fan during the last half of the 2020s but will be behind us by the turn of the next decade.
Posts: 4,336
Threads: 7
Joined: Jul 2016
02-11-2020, 04:05 PM
(This post was last modified: 02-11-2020, 04:05 PM by David Horn.)
(02-11-2020, 02:04 PM)Skabungus Wrote: There is a lot of stuff teetering. Just hanging there, waiting for a good breeze to push it over.
- Middle East and North Africa, now an vast wasteland. Rampant poverty and dislocation. Broken governments and government by murder gangs and non-state actors. The viable parties (Egypt, Turkey, Iran and Saudi Arabia et al) suffer as well with rising debt, refugee problems and lock tight dictatorships. Israel grows in its boldness and the proposed one state solution is a powder keg both internally and with a host of non-state actors willing to act.
- Afghanistan, Pakistan, India and Burma. Racial/religious/cultural tensions on the rise and if the past is any indication, issues in this region have the capability of going from 0 indicator to full blown crisis at light speed.
- North Korea
- The "Far East" China's issues seem to be compounding at an alarming rate. Many of its problems are of it's own creation (viral outbreaks reeducation camps for Muslims, the nine dash line, rampant spying exposed) and some brought on my the outside (Taiwan, push back on trade from the US, African states and India).
- Pacific island nations and the land down under are feeling the impact of climate change with island nations actually disappearing, fires and a rise is racial/nationalistic tensions.
- Europe and Great Britain seeing a rise in right-wing nationalism and a simultaneous drop in enthusiasm from left wing proponents. Russia looms larger and larger particularly for former East Bloc states all the while NATO dithers about.
- Africa. Africa is just fucked. Aside from Kenya, Tanzania and Ethiopia, the entire continent is composed of failed states, violent non-state actors, famine, disease and failed economies.
The only thing it doesn't have right now is the Corona Virus. Yet.
- The Americas are in a lot worse shape than we choose to recognize. Central America with its drug cartels, corrupt government, refugee problems and failed or failing states have a huge price tag attached whether white middle class Americans choose to recognize it or not. Chickens coming home to roost.
There is perfect storm material out there boiling around to create a crisis crescendo at any given moment. All of them COULD precipitate a major war, or collection of wars. All of them could spell huge economic pain with or without a major war. I will not sacrifice the goat and read the entrails but only say that it would not surprise me in the slightest should I rise tomorrow to hear the crisis crescendo(s) were upon us.
There are a few things I believe will figure prominently into the hindsight on this turning.
-- Rise of non-state actors and global affinity groups as key influences in the course of events.
-- Shrinking significance of the nation state in determining the course of events and eventual outcomes.
-- Increasing inability of the nation state model to function at all.
-- The pervasive impact of technology on human perception and reason.
When the shit goes down, I think it will be fast and furious. I somehow, against reason, feel it will be over as fast as it starts. Not a 15 year protracted engagement, but a few short and REALLY EXCITING TO THE POINT OF TERROR YEARS.
When the smoke clears I think a few things will be completely absent. Baby Boomer influence, the war over abortion and the age of technology will be among them. In their place I see clear, pragmatic, secular models that make the best of a bad situation for the most people possible. It wont be called socialism either. It will be called getting the job done.
There was an MIT economist by the name of Rudi Dornbusch who is noted to have said, and I paraphrase here: Bad things go on much longer than we expect, then change happens very quickly. We've already waited a long time. Can we go on to the next thing? 
Intelligence is not knowledge and knowledge is not wisdom, but they all play well together.
Posts: 10,013
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2016
(02-11-2020, 01:18 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: (02-10-2020, 05:26 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: (02-10-2020, 04:41 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: Of course, it's ideal for the US for us to put off the crisis as long as possible here, so we end up with a relatively safe intervention in overseas wars. We can hope it breaks out in Europe or China first.
"a relatively safe intervention in overseas wars?" That would
a) not be a 4T, and/or
b) probably not safe
A relatively safe intervention in overseas wars was what got us out of the crisis last time around. "Relatively safe" can be a far cry from "safe" on an absolute scale, of course.
World War Two was not relatively safe.
Posts: 10,465
Threads: 197
Joined: May 2016
(02-11-2020, 02:04 PM)Skabungus Wrote: There is a lot of stuff teetering. Just hanging there, waiting for a good breeze to push it over.
- Middle East and North Africa, now an vast wasteland. Rampant poverty and dislocation. Broken governments and government by murder gangs and non-state actors. The viable parties (Egypt, Turkey, Iran and Saudi Arabia et al) suffer as well with rising debt, refugee problems and lock tight dictatorships. Israel grows in its boldness and the proposed one state solution is a powder keg both internally and with a host of non-state actors willing to act.
- Afghanistan, Pakistan, India and Burma. Racial/religious/cultural tensions on the rise and if the past is any indication, issues in this region have the capability of going from 0 indicator to full blown crisis at light speed.
- North Korea
- The "Far East" China's issues seem to be compounding at an alarming rate. Many of its problems are of it's own creation (viral outbreaks reeducation camps for Muslims, the nine dash line, rampant spying exposed) and some brought on my the outside (Taiwan, push back on trade from the US, African states and India).
- Pacific island nations and the land down under are feeling the impact of climate change with island nations actually disappearing, fires and a rise is racial/nationalistic tensions.
- Europe and Great Britain seeing a rise in right-wing nationalism and a simultaneous drop in enthusiasm from left wing proponents. Russia looms larger and larger particularly for former East Bloc states all the while NATO dithers about.
- Africa. Africa is just fucked. Aside from Kenya, Tanzania and Ethiopia, the entire continent is composed of failed states, violent non-state actors, famine, disease and failed economies.
The only thing it doesn't have right now is the Corona Virus. Yet.
- The Americas are in a lot worse shape than we choose to recognize. Central America with its drug cartels, corrupt government, refugee problems and failed or failing states have a huge price tag attached whether white middle class Americans choose to recognize it or not. Chickens coming home to roost.
There is perfect storm material out there boiling around to create a crisis crescendo at any given moment. All of them COULD precipitate a major war, or collection of wars. All of them could spell huge economic pain with or without a major war. I will not sacrifice the goat and read the entrails but only say that it would not surprise me in the slightest should I rise tomorrow to hear the crisis crescendo(s) were upon us.
There are a few things I believe will figure prominently into the hindsight on this turning.
-- Rise of non-state actors and global affinity groups as key influences in the course of events.
-- Shrinking significance of the nation state in determining the course of events and eventual outcomes.
-- Increasing inability of the nation state model to function at all.
-- The pervasive impact of technology on human perception and reason.
When the shit goes down, I think it will be fast and furious. I somehow, against reason, feel it will be over as fast as it starts. Not a 15 year protracted engagement, but a few short and REALLY EXCITING TO THE POINT OF TERROR YEARS.
When the smoke clears I think a few things will be completely absent. Baby Boomer influence, the war over abortion and the age of technology will be among them. In their place I see clear, pragmatic, secular models that make the best of a bad situation for the most people possible. It wont be called socialism either. It will be called getting the job done.
People trying to protect a situation that has its origin before the Crisis will often find such untenable. The people with the most entrenched interests but the least competency for protecting them stand to lose the most. Economic equivalents of the gravy train for corrupt, amoral, unimaginative elites can derail.
Most people will put the survival of themselves and people like them above the rescue of effete interests. The enforcement of class privilege and monopoly power will be impossible. In some places the choice will be by vote; in some places the consequences will be coups, revolutions, and military debacles.
What wins in a Crisis Era is in the end principle (even if the Boom elite in America seems to have had no principle higher than selfish indulgence), pragmatism, and reason. Sentimentality, perversion, and cruelty fail. As the Christmas carol I Heard the Bells on Christmas Day from the American Civil War puts it:
"The wrong shall fail, the right prevail".
In America I expect the GOP to resort to dirty tricks to save their hold on power: intimidation, treachery, and outright fraud. Will such work? God help us if it does. The GOP has a shrinking coalition and a grossly-inadequate President.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.
Posts: 10,013
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2016
I'd say the threat of viruses like Corona and Ebola are a serious threat to humanity in this 4T. They arise because we humans have encroached upon the habitat of animals too much, I would say. These are animal viruses, and humans are getting too close to them too often now. It's part of our disrespect for other species and domination of living space, but it could cost us dearly if we are wiped out.
Posts: 10,013
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2016
02-11-2020, 11:38 PM
(This post was last modified: 02-11-2020, 11:38 PM by Eric the Green.)
(02-11-2020, 08:39 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: People trying to protect a situation that has its origin before the Crisis will often find such untenable. The people with the most entrenched interests but the least competency for protecting them stand to lose the most. Economic equivalents of the gravy train for corrupt, amoral, unimaginative elites can derail.
Most people will put the survival of themselves and people like them above the rescue of effete interests. The enforcement of class privilege and monopoly power will be impossible. In some places the choice will be by vote; in some places the consequences will be coups, revolutions, and military debacles.
What wins in a Crisis Era is in the end principle (even if the Boom elite in America seems to have had no principle higher than selfish indulgence), pragmatism, and reason. Sentimentality, perversion, and cruelty fail. As the Christmas carol I Heard the Bells on Christmas Day from the American Civil War puts it:
"The wrong shall fail, the right prevail".
In America I expect the GOP to resort to dirty tricks to save their hold on power: intimidation, treachery, and outright fraud. Will such work? God help us if it does. The GOP has a shrinking coalition and a grossly-inadequate President.
I'd say that was well said.
Posts: 10,013
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2016
02-11-2020, 11:56 PM
(This post was last modified: 02-11-2020, 11:59 PM by Eric the Green.)
(02-11-2020, 02:04 PM)Skabungus Wrote: There is a lot of stuff teetering. Just hanging there, waiting for a good breeze to push it over....
When the shit goes down, I think it will be fast and furious. I somehow, against reason, feel it will be over as fast as it starts. Not a 15 year protracted engagement, but a few short and REALLY EXCITING TO THE POINT OF TERROR YEARS.
When the smoke clears I think a few things will be completely absent. Baby Boomer influence, the war over abortion and the age of technology will be among them. In their place I see clear, pragmatic, secular models that make the best of a bad situation for the most people possible. It wont be called socialism either. It will be called getting the job done.
Pretty good summary. However, Baby Boomer influence will continue for a while though. The war over abortion and other culture war issues remain in the background. Age of Technology absent? You're kidding.
I do think a more pragmatic approach will gain ground, since the jobs need to be done. But as you point out, lots of jobs need to be done. It may take more than pragmatism to move the needles. But the 4T will last the full 21 years, starting in 2008 and ending in 2029. The crunch time has not even begun. It will take a few years before the dams erected by the reactionaries over the last 40 years will burst, as they must for progress to resume. That's why I don't think the 4T climax will be over as fast as it starts. Such big hurdles don't collapse overnight. But I think the temperature and the speed of events and changes will increase throughout the 2020s, and will climax in the second half of the decade.
Posts: 868
Threads: 3
Joined: May 2016
2 answer the question posed on the op- if Bernie keeps prevailing then it probably has 
 my 2 yr old Niece/yr old Nephew 2020
Posts: 4,336
Threads: 7
Joined: Jul 2016
(02-12-2020, 06:10 AM)Marypoza Wrote: 2 answer the question posed on the op- if Bernie keeps prevailing then it probably has
There's an interesting read in the NY Times, that fits the theory to a tee. In short, Bernie may or may not win the Presidency, but he certainly has won the mantle of Grey Champion.
Intelligence is not knowledge and knowledge is not wisdom, but they all play well together.
Posts: 868
Threads: 3
Joined: May 2016
(02-12-2020, 12:42 PM)David Horn Wrote: (02-12-2020, 06:10 AM)Marypoza Wrote: 2 answer the question posed on the op- if Bernie keeps prevailing then it probably has
There's an interesting read in the NY Times, that fits the theory to a tee. In short, Bernie may or may not win the Presidency, but he certainly has won the mantle of Grey Champion.
-- the NYT blocks me from reading their articles so I'll take your word on that. I do agree that the GC don' have 2b the Prez. Benjamin Franklin was never Prez, never even ran 4 the office. The only office he ever held was Postmaster. But S&H considered him 2b the Revolution's GC. Bernie's ideas r inspiring ppl & catching on, building a movement & becoming mainstream. That's what makes him a GC.
my 2 yr old Niece/yr old Nephew 2020
Posts: 4,336
Threads: 7
Joined: Jul 2016
02-13-2020, 10:41 AM
(This post was last modified: 02-13-2020, 10:43 AM by David Horn.)
(02-13-2020, 05:36 AM)Marypoza Wrote: (02-12-2020, 12:42 PM)David Horn Wrote: (02-12-2020, 06:10 AM)Marypoza Wrote: 2 answer the question posed on the op- if Bernie keeps prevailing then it probably has
There's an interesting read in the NY Times, that fits the theory to a tee. In short, Bernie may or may not win the Presidency, but he certainly has won the mantle of Grey Champion.
-- the NYT blocks me from reading their articles so I'll take your word on that. I do agree that the GC don' have 2b the Prez. Benjamin Franklin was never Prez, never even ran 4 the office. The only office he ever held was Postmaster. But S&H considered him 2b the Revolution's GC. Bernie's ideas r inspiring ppl & catching on, building a movement & becoming mainstream. That's what makes him a GC.
OK, so here's the article in full (disclaimer: for information only):
Michael Kazin in the February 12, 2020 NYT Wrote:Opinion
Bernie Sanders Has Already Won
Whether he captures the White House or not, he has transformed the Democratic Party.
By Michael Kazin
Dr. Kazin is writing a history of the Democratic Party.
Feb. 12, 2020
Despite his victory Tuesday night in the New Hampshire primary, Bernie Sanders still faces an uphill climb to win the Democratic nomination and if successful could well lose to President Trump this fall. Yet even in defeat, the first self-declared socialist in American history to have a realistic chance at both prizes is likely to achieve a different kind of victory, one few actual presidents ever have: transforming the ideology and program of a major party.
In fact, those candidates who manage to shift the party decisively are often not the ones who win the White House itself.
In 1896, William Jennings Bryan, running as a Democrat against William McKinley, traveled the nation denouncing “the money power” and defending the rights of labor. Despite his loss that year, and in two subsequent races, his party embraced the pro-regulation, antimonopoly, pro-union stand of this eloquent politician called “the Great Commoner.” The resulting policies did much to elect Woodrow Wilson to the White House twice (with Bryan as his secretary of state from 1913 to 1915) and Franklin Roosevelt four times.
In 1972, Senator George McGovern suffered a landslide drubbing in his attempt to persuade voters who detested the war in Vietnam to unseat Richard Nixon. Yet since then, most activist Democrats have effectively echoed McGovern’s plea to “Come Home, America.” Like him, they oppose nearly every armed intervention overseas and advocate shrinking the military budget.
In 1988, Jesse Jackson thrilled crowds with denunciations of the “economic violence” committed by big corporations that moved factories to lands where labor was cheap and unions impotent. Nearly three decades before Bernie Sanders decided to run for president, Mr. Jackson, the leader of what was then the National Rainbow Coalition and the first black candidate to win millions of votes, was vigorously preaching the same gospel of national health insurance, jobs for all and higher taxes on the rich.
Just one Republican insurgent has wielded such influence after his run for the White House ended in defeat: Senator Barry Goldwater. But his campaign may have been the most consequential of them all. In 1964, Goldwater had the temerity to advocate rolling back the welfare state built by Franklin Roosevelt and his successors, and he accused liberal Democrats of weakening the nation’s resolve in the Cold War. He was also one of just six Republican senators to vote against the Civil Rights Act that year.
But Goldwater’s 20-point loss to Lyndon Johnson failed to discourage his conservative admirers. They went on to build a mighty movement that captured the Republican Party in 1980 and has never let go. While the Republican right has, often grudgingly, acquiesced to federal enforcement of civil rights, it continues to emulate Goldwater’s blend of laissez-faire economics and support for a robust national security state.
All these partisan rebels had something in common besides their prophetic influence. Each stirred great enthusiasm among voters but also met stiff resistance within their parties, a major reason none came close to taking the White House. All were protest candidates against the party establishments of their day, and the establishments fought back.
In 1896, conservative Democrats loyal to the outgoing incumbent, Grover Cleveland, condemned Bryan’s talk of bashing big business and even mounted a third-party ticket they knew would help the Republican nominee. In 1972, the A.F.L.-C.I.O., headed by George Meany, blasted McGovern as “an apologist for the communist world” whose delegates were “kooks and nuts.” After McGovern was nominated, the labor body, the indispensable pillar of the New Deal coalition, refused to endorse anyone for president. The decision broke a tradition of backing Democratic nominees that stretched back almost four decades.
At the 1964 Republican convention, Goldwater’s “extremist” admirers loudly booed his moderate critics, and the intraparty bitterness provoked many lifelong Republicans to vote for Johnson that fall. For his part, Jesse Jackson, despite winning over a thousand delegates in 1988, came in second for the nomination to Michael Dukakis, whose bland rhetoric and cautious promises contrasted sharply with his rival’s rousing style and left-wing policies.
In his acceptance speech that summer, Dukakis declared: “This election isn’t about ideology. It’s about competence.” That line not only failed to win him enough votes to prevent the Republicans, under George H.W. Bush, from winning a third straight easy victory. It also betrayed a fundamental misunderstanding of how major changes have always occurred in our country.
Americans who are seriously disenchanted with an incumbent president or his party tend to be moved more by a serious candidate who offers a sharply different alternative, one based on a set of moral convictions, instead of merely a sense of who might be a more efficient administrator of the existing order. Such voters are usually most numerous among the young. After their candidate loses, the fervent hopes he (and someday, she) inspired continue to motivate followers to convert their party to the same ideas and chart a path to future victory.
Since he began running for president five years ago, Senator Sanders and his supporters have nudged Democrats to take stands to the left of where the center of the party was when Barack Obama moved out of the White House. Every remaining candidate for president now endorses either Medicare for All or a robust public option, doubling the minimum wage, much higher taxes on the rich, legislation to facilitate union organizing and a transition to an economy based on sources of renewable energy. Even if the delegates in Milwaukee this summer choose a different nominee, they will surely endorse such policies and make them central to the drive to make Donald Trump a one-term president.
So whatever his electoral fate, the socialist from Vermont who is pushing 80 is likely to be remembered as a more transformative figure than many politicians who won an election but whom most Americans were quite glad to put behind them. Mr. Sanders wants to be the next Franklin Roosevelt — but if he can’t, better to be the next William Jennings Bryan or Jesse Jackson than the next William Howard Taft.
Michael Kazin, a professor of history at Georgetown and a co-editor of Dissent, is writing a history of the Democratic Party.
Intelligence is not knowledge and knowledge is not wisdom, but they all play well together.
Posts: 868
Threads: 3
Joined: May 2016
(02-13-2020, 10:41 AM)David Horn Wrote: (02-13-2020, 05:36 AM)Marypoza Wrote: (02-12-2020, 12:42 PM)David Horn Wrote: (02-12-2020, 06:10 AM)Marypoza Wrote: 2 answer the question posed on the op- if Bernie keeps prevailing then it probably has
There's an interesting read in the NY Times, that fits the theory to a tee. In short, Bernie may or may not win the Presidency, but he certainly has won the mantle of Grey Champion.
-- the NYT blocks me from reading their articles so I'll take your word on that. I do agree that the GC don' have 2b the Prez. Benjamin Franklin was never Prez, never even ran 4 the office. The only office he ever held was Postmaster. But S&H considered him 2b the Revolution's GC. Bernie's ideas r inspiring ppl & catching on, building a movement & becoming mainstream. That's what makes him a GC.
OK, so here's the article in full (disclaimer: for information only):
Michael Kazin in the February 12, 2020 NYT Wrote:Opinion
Bernie Sanders Has Already Won
Whether he captures the White House or not, he has transformed the Democratic Party.
By Michael Kazin
Dr. Kazin is writing a history of the Democratic Party.
Feb. 12, 2020
Despite his victory Tuesday night in the New Hampshire primary, Bernie Sanders still faces an uphill climb to win the Democratic nomination and if successful could well lose to President Trump this fall. Yet even in defeat, the first self-declared socialist in American history to have a realistic chance at both prizes is likely to achieve a different kind of victory, one few actual presidents ever have: transforming the ideology and program of a major party.
In fact, those candidates who manage to shift the party decisively are often not the ones who win the White House itself.
In 1896, William Jennings Bryan, running as a Democrat against William McKinley, traveled the nation denouncing “the money power” and defending the rights of labor. Despite his loss that year, and in two subsequent races, his party embraced the pro-regulation, antimonopoly, pro-union stand of this eloquent politician called “the Great Commoner.” The resulting policies did much to elect Woodrow Wilson to the White House twice (with Bryan as his secretary of state from 1913 to 1915) and Franklin Roosevelt four times.
In 1972, Senator George McGovern suffered a landslide drubbing in his attempt to persuade voters who detested the war in Vietnam to unseat Richard Nixon. Yet since then, most activist Democrats have effectively echoed McGovern’s plea to “Come Home, America.” Like him, they oppose nearly every armed intervention overseas and advocate shrinking the military budget.
In 1988, Jesse Jackson thrilled crowds with denunciations of the “economic violence” committed by big corporations that moved factories to lands where labor was cheap and unions impotent. Nearly three decades before Bernie Sanders decided to run for president, Mr. Jackson, the leader of what was then the National Rainbow Coalition and the first black candidate to win millions of votes, was vigorously preaching the same gospel of national health insurance, jobs for all and higher taxes on the rich.
Just one Republican insurgent has wielded such influence after his run for the White House ended in defeat: Senator Barry Goldwater. But his campaign may have been the most consequential of them all. In 1964, Goldwater had the temerity to advocate rolling back the welfare state built by Franklin Roosevelt and his successors, and he accused liberal Democrats of weakening the nation’s resolve in the Cold War. He was also one of just six Republican senators to vote against the Civil Rights Act that year.
But Goldwater’s 20-point loss to Lyndon Johnson failed to discourage his conservative admirers. They went on to build a mighty movement that captured the Republican Party in 1980 and has never let go. While the Republican right has, often grudgingly, acquiesced to federal enforcement of civil rights, it continues to emulate Goldwater’s blend of laissez-faire economics and support for a robust national security state.
All these partisan rebels had something in common besides their prophetic influence. Each stirred great enthusiasm among voters but also met stiff resistance within their parties, a major reason none came close to taking the White House. All were protest candidates against the party establishments of their day, and the establishments fought back.
In 1896, conservative Democrats loyal to the outgoing incumbent, Grover Cleveland, condemned Bryan’s talk of bashing big business and even mounted a third-party ticket they knew would help the Republican nominee. In 1972, the A.F.L.-C.I.O., headed by George Meany, blasted McGovern as “an apologist for the communist world” whose delegates were “kooks and nuts.” After McGovern was nominated, the labor body, the indispensable pillar of the New Deal coalition, refused to endorse anyone for president. The decision broke a tradition of backing Democratic nominees that stretched back almost four decades.
At the 1964 Republican convention, Goldwater’s “extremist” admirers loudly booed his moderate critics, and the intraparty bitterness provoked many lifelong Republicans to vote for Johnson that fall. For his part, Jesse Jackson, despite winning over a thousand delegates in 1988, came in second for the nomination to Michael Dukakis, whose bland rhetoric and cautious promises contrasted sharply with his rival’s rousing style and left-wing policies.
In his acceptance speech that summer, Dukakis declared: “This election isn’t about ideology. It’s about competence.” That line not only failed to win him enough votes to prevent the Republicans, under George H.W. Bush, from winning a third straight easy victory. It also betrayed a fundamental misunderstanding of how major changes have always occurred in our country.
Americans who are seriously disenchanted with an incumbent president or his party tend to be moved more by a serious candidate who offers a sharply different alternative, one based on a set of moral convictions, instead of merely a sense of who might be a more efficient administrator of the existing order. Such voters are usually most numerous among the young. After their candidate loses, the fervent hopes he (and someday, she) inspired continue to motivate followers to convert their party to the same ideas and chart a path to future victory.
Since he began running for president five years ago, Senator Sanders and his supporters have nudged Democrats to take stands to the left of where the center of the party was when Barack Obama moved out of the White House. Every remaining candidate for president now endorses either Medicare for All or a robust public option, doubling the minimum wage, much higher taxes on the rich, legislation to facilitate union organizing and a transition to an economy based on sources of renewable energy. Even if the delegates in Milwaukee this summer choose a different nominee, they will surely endorse such policies and make them central to the drive to make Donald Trump a one-term president.
So whatever his electoral fate, the socialist from Vermont who is pushing 80 is likely to be remembered as a more transformative figure than many politicians who won an election but whom most Americans were quite glad to put behind them. Mr. Sanders wants to be the next Franklin Roosevelt — but if he can’t, better to be the next William Jennings Bryan or Jesse Jackson than the next William Howard Taft.
Michael Kazin, a professor of history at Georgetown and a co-editor of Dissent, is writing a history of the Democratic Party.
--thanx 4 sharing. Only difference is Bryan & McGovern were candidates during an Awakening while Jesse Jackson ran during an Unraveling. Bernie is running during a Crisis. I wonder how that will affect the party if they don't adapt 2 his ideas. Also re:McGovern, I'm not so sure how antiwar some of these Dems truly are
my 2 yr old Niece/yr old Nephew 2020
Posts: 10,013
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2016
02-14-2020, 01:41 AM
(This post was last modified: 02-15-2020, 01:10 AM by Eric the Green.)
"So whatever his electoral fate, the socialist from Vermont who is pushing 80 is likely to be remembered as a more transformative figure than many politicians who won an election but whom most Americans were quite glad to put behind them. Mr. Sanders wants to be the next Franklin Roosevelt — but if he can’t, better to be the next William Jennings Bryan or Jesse Jackson than the next William Howard Taft."
Indeed; I hope so, if his ideas do prevail to a large extent after the 4T has done its work on us.
And indeed, after McGovern the Democratic Party of Harry Truman (Korea) and LBJ (Vietnam) became much more of a peacenik party. Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton "waged peace" and did not cause any American war casualties. John Kerry ran against the Iraq War, and so did Barack Obama. True, Democratic presidents and candidates don't oppose all wars, and they make some mistakes and errors, but they often oppose senseless wars and unnecessary interventions and seek diplomacy first.
Pointing out the error of Dukakis that he offered the choice of a competent administrator rather than an inspired new direction is reflected by the fact that he had the lowest horoscope score of any modern candidate. He could not connect with what the people really wanted in a president. Some of our current contenders make similar appeals, notably Klobuchar and Bloomberg, and they have lower scores than Trump who offers incompetence but satisfies his crowds with his fake promises of different policies (and more than that, with his appeals to their prejudices and fears).
Posts: 4,336
Threads: 7
Joined: Jul 2016
This election will set the direction of the Democrats for a long time, just as Trump's success has set it for the GOPpers. This will happen regardless of who wins the general elections, because a failed Democrat will invalidate that wing of the party -- especially true if a second Hillary-type makes the cut. But Bernie fans need to be a bit cautious too. He and they are selling a radical change, and failing to get the sale will doom that effort for the 2024 election -- a slamdunk if Trump is reelected this time.
These are dangerous times. Introspection is mandatory, because screw-ups cannot be tolerated!
Intelligence is not knowledge and knowledge is not wisdom, but they all play well together.
Posts: 10,013
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2016
(02-14-2020, 07:52 AM)David Horn Wrote: This election will set the direction of the Democrats for a long time, just as Trump's success has set it for the GOPpers. This will happen regardless of who wins the general elections, because a failed Democrat will invalidate that wing of the party -- especially true if a second Hillary-type makes the cut. But Bernie fans need to be a bit cautious too. He and they are selling a radical change, and failing to get the sale will doom that effort for the 2024 election -- a slamdunk if Trump is reelected this time.
These are dangerous times. Introspection is mandatory, because screw-ups cannot be tolerated!
Doesn't this go against what the Kazin article says, that a failed candidate can set the direction for the party if (s)he brings in a new direction that inspires the people?
It's true; Bernie as president could be overturned in 2024 if he fails to make any change.
My indicator (the new moon before the election) says the challenger will win the popular vote in 2024, and that the incumbent will win it in 2020. But it's only one of several indicators. Our destiny and our future as a nation may require that some of my indicators are wrong this time, and maybe in 2024 too. Unless our destiny is to fail and screw up the world.
Posts: 4,336
Threads: 7
Joined: Jul 2016
(02-14-2020, 11:30 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: (02-14-2020, 07:52 AM)David Horn Wrote: This election will set the direction of the Democrats for a long time, just as Trump's success has set it for the GOPpers. This will happen regardless of who wins the general elections, because a failed Democrat will invalidate that wing of the party -- especially true if a second Hillary-type makes the cut. But Bernie fans need to be a bit cautious too. He and they are selling a radical change, and failing to get the sale will doom that effort for the 2024 election -- a slamdunk if Trump is reelected this time.
These are dangerous times. Introspection is mandatory, because screw-ups cannot be tolerated!
Doesn't this go against what the Kazin article says, that a failed candidate can set the direction for the party if (s)he brings in a new direction that inspires the people?
I think the Kazin article was addressing the intraparty struggle, so losing this round of primaries (again) may actually reinforced Bernie's vision -- especially so, if the moderate Dem loses to Trump.
Eric Wrote:It's true; Bernie as president could be overturned in 2024 if he fails to make any change.
The ability of the more radical Dems to actually make policy will be limited by the magnitude of their win. If Trump and GOP Senate crash and burn, it's game-on. That's less likely than a narrow win, though.
Eric Wrote:My indicator (the new moon before the election) says the challenger will win the popular vote in 2024, and that the incumbent will win it in 2020. But it's only one of several indicators. Our destiny and our future as a nation may require that some of my indicators are wrong this time, and maybe in 2024 too. Unless our destiny is to fail and screw up the world.
Amen to that.
Intelligence is not knowledge and knowledge is not wisdom, but they all play well together.
Posts: 868
Threads: 3
Joined: May 2016
02-14-2020, 05:06 PM
(This post was last modified: 02-15-2020, 02:55 AM by Marypoza.)
What l am asking if the Dems can even continue as a viable party if they don't adapt 2 Bernie's ideas, which are basically old school Dem. l have noticed a pattern of parties coming during Awakenings & going during Crises. Or in the case of the Dems, reinventing- u don't stick around some 220 years w/out doing some reinventing. The Dems got their start in the very late 18th century as an answer to the Federalist Party, @ 1st they were simply known as anti-Federalists, but then Thomas Jefferson renamed them Democratic Republicans. We'll just stick with Dems. Anyhow, this was during a High, but it was as the Govt was just getting started, so maybe that's why these 2 factions started when they did. Anyhow, the Federalists went as soon as they came, & the Dems dominated the political scene 4 the rest of the High, known as the era of Good Feelings. When the Awakening came along so did the Whigs as a party viable enough 2 compete w/the Dems. But that was not 2 last. During the Unraveling, the Whigs went off the off the rails with xenophobia, in fact their last Prez, Millard Fillmore, was actually a Know Nothing which was a very xenophobic 3rd party that infiltrated the Whigs. The Dems, in contrast, welcomed immigrants in2 their party- this was during the Potato Famine- but they also adhered 2 slavery, afterall their founders, Jefferson, Monroe, Jackson etc.. were all slaveholders. Abolitionist Whigs & Dems started forming new parties such as the Free Soil party, & of course the repugs. After the Civil War Crisis, the Whigs & most of the 3rd parties were gone, only the Dems & repugs were left standing, & the Dems were weakened so the repugs dominated the ensuing High. During the 1890s Awakening the Populists came along. The Dems absorbed them. The Labor Movement started when the Civil War ended & peaked during the Depression Crisis, when the Dems absorbed them. Which is why we don't have an official Labor Party like other countries do. Finally during the last Awakening, the Dems enacted Medicare, championed Civil Rights, Women's Rights, & 2 a lesser extent Gay Rights, becoming the Big Tent Party. During the Unraveling, they rolled back on some of this bcoming 3rd Way  . Meanwhile the repugs starting going off the rails. They were infiltrated by the Tea Party, but instead of moderate repugs forming their own party, they have been infiltrating the Dems, turning it into a blue dog party & alienating long time old school Dems. Bernie, despite calling himself a democratic socialist, is actually an old school Dem, who is trying to return the party to the old school platform of the Big Tent Era, which is why he's so popular with these ppl.
now if Bernie is screwed over again, or even if he isn't, will his ppl vote 4 the Democratic nominee. Remember alot of Berniecrats aren't Dems -including Bernie 4 that matter- & are just with the party 4 Bernie. If he's not the nominee, they will move on, probably 2 the Green Party, whose platform is very similar 2 what Bernie advocates. If they vote as a block, they could very well tip the Greens over the 5% threshold, which would enable them 2 build a viable progressive party. l have also heard stories that the Unions might bolt from the party as well, since the party has been abandoning the working class 4 the past several decades Normally l would say these r just stories & the bosses r corrupt, but this is a 4T- a Crisis- so it's possible the Unions may decide 2 spend their $ running their own candidates if the Dems don't start running labor friendly candidates. if not this election, then maybe in 2024, when we'll be deeper in2 the Crisis.
so my question is, if the Dems don't adapt 2 Bernie's agenda, will they survive as a party?
my 2 yr old Niece/yr old Nephew 2020
Posts: 10,013
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2016
02-15-2020, 01:05 AM
(This post was last modified: 02-15-2020, 01:13 AM by Eric the Green.)
It's also a question of whether, if Bernie isn't nominated and many of his supporters bolt in 2020, will we survive as a country? 4 more years of Trump will be a major obstacle to this. The Republican Party is the one that needs to die. Like, yesterday.
If Bernie IS nominated, and the moderates bolt as a result, that could also endanger the Republic. The Dems need to be united against a transcendent evil this time. The question is whether they will be. If the country dies, I'm not sure it matters which party dies.
Sanders is the regeneracy candidate. If the Dems don't choose him, they may lose anyway, because the other candidates aren't up to the job of beating Trump, let alone setting a new course for the country. Bernie can do both, although "can" does not equal "will."
|
