Forum Post: Parties do end.
Posted 12 years ago on April 9, 2012, 8:22 a.m. EST by factsrfun
(8310)
from Phoenix, AZ
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
The Democrat Party was born out of a desire to protect workers from government backed industrial complex in the 1850’s, the Whig party thought industry should rule; we got rid of the Whigs, we can get rid of the Republicans.
Sorry, basically from the age of Andrew Jackson in the 1820s until after the Second Reconstruction in the 1960s the Democratic Party was the Party of the southern slavocracy and its heirs. The Whigs collapsed because of the crisis of slavery. When barn burner, loco foco and anti slavery democrats, combined with Liberty Party, Free Soil Party, abolitionists and anti slavery Whigs to form the Republican Party.
With the end of the civil war the coalition between northern workers and incipient industrial corporations collapsed. The Democrats were allowed back into the coalition of the ruling class as junior partners and the two parties of the 1% have swapped power back and forth ever since, in the mean time co-opting, in tern, the Populists, the Socialists, the Progressives, the labor movement, the civil rights movement the antiwar movement, the women's movement and every other social movement attempting to build a mass culture of opposition.
Today the Democrats control the White House and half of Congress. They control the War Department. The Democratic President is the Commander in Chief of the largest imperial military force in the history of the universe. All over the nation muncipal Democratic administrations smash Occupy encampments with the help of a Democratically controlled FBI, a Democratic controlled Justice Department and a Democratic controlled Department of Homeland Security. Anybody who thinks the Democratic Party is any more a party of the people than is the Republican Party just isn't paying attention. That's why I'm in Occupy. That's why Occupy and not the Democrats or Republicans, is my party.
thats why im an independent thank you for saying that. couldn't say it better my self
It is true that both the Democratic and Republican parties have been moving farther and farther to the right economically and the both of them have been willing to endorse a number of disappointingly authoritarian policies (the Republicans under Bush II initiated the first and the worst of these policies immediately post-9/11, but once the shock wore off it appears that both parties are willing to play that game now). The Democrats are not perfect and they have done a number of things I disagree with. If it appeared to me at this stage that getting behind independent or third-party candidates or moderate Republicans were a way to fix that, then that is what I would be doing right now. The problem is that neither of these things really works.
That said, there are a number of things that voting for Obama and the Democrats can and has accomplished, namely in terms of Supreme Court nominees. All you have to do is take a look at the split on the recent Supreme Court decision on the constitutionality of strip-searches on suspicion of minor offenses such as traffic tickets; all of the justices tenured under Republican presidents had no problem with this while the others (including Obama's new appointees) were willing to go down in history as being against it.
Overall, Democrats are far from perfect, but I see them as more easily redeemable than their counterparts across the aisle. They have a hell of a time building and keeping a strongly unified coalition (it's the downside of being a "big tent" party; the same thing that OWS struggles with, only much less pronounced.) and many of them are still standard-make politicians (which generally indicates a baseline of venality and stupidity that we have yet to expunge from DC), which is regrettable. If the Republican Party was still the party of Olympia Snowe, then I'd probably be a good deal less emphatic in my support for the Democrats and be more willing to set a high bar for reelection no matter who you align with.
That said, the Republican Party is decidedly not the party of Olympia Snowe anymore; in fact it appears that they're a good chunk of the reason why she decided not to run again. The current crop of Republicans is moving farther and farther to the right, appealing to the worst of the current fringe groups at the expense of the rest of the nation, and there's no reason to believe that they're going to stop anytime soon. That is a serious problem, and it's one that will only be worsened by voting Republican.
As for voting for independents and just discarding both major parties in exchange for constituency-based candidates who can be held directly accountable, that would be great (and that's probably more along the lines of what the Founding Fathers wanted to see anyway) but it's not particularly practical. Each seat would be an enormous uphill battle (both parties will run candidates and those candidates will have far more money and support than an independent) and there's no guarantee that such candidates wouldn't get thoroughly trounced (which renders the whole idea moot in the short term due to the extreme difficulty in implementation).
Basically, in the short run our best bet is to get involved in the Democratic Party and try to turn it into the tool of the people. Don't just vote for the slate, get yourself a position on a precinct committee and play a role in picking the slate. If enough people like you or I do that, then we as a group will have almost as much control over who we want to represent us as we would with independents but our candidates will have the full backing of an enormous machine.
When i say im an independent i mean i vote for who ever i want not just third parties.
I have voted for republicans and democrats. I vote for the person and their ideas. Not the parties. Thats why there should be no parties and just individuals. We would get a better system this way.
I do agree with you, in that I vote for individual candidates based on my opinion of their philosophies and their policy positions. Right now, that makes me a de facto Democrat for the reasons I outlined above, but if a better option came along than the current Democratic party then I would take it immediately. Lack of parties would be nice, but I don't really think it's going to happen anytime soon for reasons related to what appear to be intrinsic correlations between views on different issues, but I agree with you that in principle it would make things simpler and easier.
yes sorry that my original statement made it seem like i hate all political parties. thanks for your input
and maybe one day
No problem, and I'd like to see a better dynamic than what we have now as well.
I suppose many will vote third party, as they did in 2000 and evil will win and we are all pretty much screwed, that’s what I think is most likely to happen it’s what always has happened, why should you break the mold?
^doesnt realize Obama has bombed 6 nations in three years, and is just Bush Part II.
unlike you I realize what Romeny will do, or maybe you do
He will do more of the same, possibly more.
Glad you think bombing 6 nations is acceptable.
You are a total sell out, no backbone and are more than willing to cast a vote for more innocent deaths.
PS- get out of your Obama vs Romney box.
I think doing something to stop it matters more than walking around with your chest puffed out, the only thing you post on is electoral poltics, trying to keep us from making a difference, do you really think anybody is fooled by your crap?
What occupation do you go to again? Oh ya, you dont.
kickin your butt here, but that's a hobby
I will break the mold because i don't fit in it. My generation does fit into a party. We mostly fit in the libertarian party but we don't want things to be all like that. So we face a dilemma have social freedom but be oppressed in the economic world. Or we can have economic freedom and be oppressed in the social world.
Most of us want both. Honestly we dot care about the "hot" issues because they don't matter. What most of us want is to be able to be economically successful while maintaining our social and personal needs.
also stop calling it evil its childish and stupid so please lets be adults here
I do firmly believe the Republican Party as it exists today is indeed evil, but didn't see it in this thread, so not sure about your reference.
I'll tell you what I won't be your morther, and you don't try to be mine, how's that? Too childish?
I did not realize that you were Superman and break the mold, glad to know that, guess the rest of us can take a break.
With that comment i know why you resent and hate all things that don't fit into your ideals.
Even molds break and become twisted. I don't want to be what my peers want me to be. I want to be what i am a human being who can change the world. I soak up knowledge form all sides and all sources to get there. I live by ethics so that i know my choices are humane. So superman your to kind i'll take the modest route and say i'm batman.
I hope for the country's sake that human being has a mind, because if it does I would like to present some ideas and opinions, but is your mind closed to those?
Im open talk away
I think voting for a third party is really stupid.
Well ok that's your opinion i wish we had forth and fifth parties. I wish we had six major parties that we could chose from. That way we could actually have a more Representative government like it was set up to be. We need more people to have ideas. Things are not black and white things have a multitude of answers so we need a system that has a multitude of answers not just one
but we don't and under the consitution we are unlikely to in the near future, so where do you stand on voting third party, given how things are today?
the constitution has nothing to do with the numbers of parties. There is no strong third party so i don't know what i will do. voting is my own private matter and i will keep it that way.
going to the park is a private matter for some, for some it is a statement, I do understand
But facts just told you that we'll not have more than two parties under this alleged constitution, therefore, it must be true.
it must be true god im done with people like him/her. I'm actually embarrassed that people believe that bullshit
Many of these shills are on the payroll for elected zoo animals.
Thank you! You speak for me as well, that last paragraph is exactly how I feel as well.
[Removed]
So what are you sorry about?
Are you sorry that as a divisive troll your only propose here is to divide us and make us weak?
Are you sorry that people have awaken to the problems of wealth inequalities and they challenge the soft life of your masters?
Are you sorry that people may realize that you have no reason to be here except to make us weak?
I know you’ve fooled a few with your fake background but unfortunately for you I know real communists, and they think about a lot more than just how evil the Democrats are. You have been to school though so my read is your a paid troll, but I could be wrong about that.
By the way thanks for pointing out that there have been several other parties that were brought down by the people not just the Whigs.
The important thing to remember here people is that we can do this, we can bring down the Republican Party and bust the dems in half, but only if we get rid of the Republicans first, you do agree with that right RED?
Do you have the slightest idea what the Occupy movement is about? There are over 1000 local general assemblies in this country. Can you name a single one that has endorsed any candidate of any political party? It seems to me that the trolls and divisive ones here are Democratic Party hack who would destroy the militant indenpendence of the Occupy movement by dragging it into the swamp of the Democratic Party. I am quite serious and sincere here. Of course Occupy does not support the Republcan party. Where in the world would anyone come up with that notion? Certainly not from anything I have ever said or written. But the fact is, it doesn't support ANY electoral politics. It is a direction movement through and through and it always has been. It is certainly not going to support a party which every day unleashes police forces on it. If any policy would be suicidal that certainly would be. It is the Democrats who now control the White House and half of Congress. Our aim is to bring down the whole sorry fucking mess, not just trade one party of the one percent for another.
Not to mention the reminder at the beginning of every GA! XD
My goodness it couldn't be more obvious.
IMHO Occupy is right to stay away from electoral politics. Individuals are free to follow their consciences and inclinations. It was direct action- everything from letters to Congressmembers to Marches to civil disobedience to riots that ended legalized racial segregation in this country. This is also what helped end the Vietnam war. Not votes.
If we don't bring our power together to act, then we will have little affect, if we are to get even a small part of what we want to do, done. We must remove the Republican Party completely, that will mean not only getting involved it will mean owning the system, we may not be up to that task, but I pray we are.
OWS is not going to be a strong electoral power anytime soon. Its strength is action.
I think if we get the truth out, the tide will turn in a big way.
Are you the offical keeper of the true path, or is there someplace I could look to learn more?
I had no ideal OWS was made up of a bunch of closed minded people.
How often do you go to a general assembly? Have you ever been to a general assembly? What general assembly are you close to? I have been a radical activist for nearly 50 years and I have been involved in every major social movement in this nation in that period. I have never seen such an open social movement. It is, however, not an electoral movement. It is a direct action movement.
why do you care so much about my history? I sure don't care about yours.
Of course what you claim to be true could not be at all;
all anyone has to do is read what you write, you have no clue what true radicals know or believe.
You never share any of these many years of insight, only your distrust of D's, that's all you really have, of course you did post that one time to help Romeny out but how lame was that?
anyway people with brains will not be fooled by you, or they will, maybe someday they will ask themselves why do you never have anything to say?
My experience in Occupy is that Occupy activists care about each other. They care about what brought them to Occupy. The questions I ask are simply to try to find out how much you actually know about Occupy as a movement. It is very clearly an anti-electoral movement and most of the Occupy activists that I have encountered are as hostile to the Democratic Party as they are to the Republican. As to why I should care about that, well, I'm in Occupy, that's my perception of what Occupy cares about and this is an Occupy forum.
you know I doubt very much you have ever been to the park
My first experience at Occupy encampments is that people are much less judgemental of each other than they are at this site. That includes me and one of the reasons why I think that e-mails are no substitute for a physical encampment. That said, while many Occupy activists will undoubtedly vote Democratic and virtually none Republican, even for those who will vote Democratic they do so rather cynically, seeing the DP as the lesser evil and certainly not a vehicle for social change, which is how they see Occupy. Precisely because virtually no Occupy activist is likely to vote Republican is why this should be a non issue on this site or in any discourse involving Occupy. The fact is, we are way past that. Sell that to the moderates who are still unclear as to what they are likely to do on election day, but you won't find any of them at an Occupation and if this is really to be an Occupy site designed to move Occupy forward then I don't see why it should be a matter of discussion here. We are way past that and have more important things to discuss.
funny how you never discuss them
What I think is most important to discuss on this site is how to implement the ideas that are generated here, including ideas that I pesonally disagree with. I have seen almost no discussion of this. This is not sruprizing becaue it is a complicated and nettlesome problem and I personally in general have no idea as to where and how to start, though it would be instructive if people reported back regarding theri experiences in getting things passed a local general assembly.
To me personally the thing that concerns me most in Occupy has to do with process, particularly the lack of formal organization and and the decision making process which is at best sluggish and at worst antidemocratic. I personally don't have any magic formula as to how to change this, though I do think that the place to start is just to begin to talk about it. No doubt there are other questions that are of moment to many Occupy activists which aren't crossing my mind. They would be important to talk about too. I'm just raising the things that have seemed to me real issues in Occupy, which the settled question of electoral politics most certainly is not.
keepin all that wage and wealth stuff to yourself, yeah you wouldn't want to share that would you, people might find out how you really feel
+1 as usual.
Owned again clown.
I think "matt the ref" has already told you what we think of you, but clown?
really what is this kindergarden?
[Removed]
Pipe down, eat your gruel and when gruel break is over.... GET YOUR ASS BACK INTO the galley to row with the rest of the bi-party slaves!
And you also need to cease spewing common sense and logic.
Why do you say the Whigs wanted industry to rule? My understanding is that they just wanted strong, national industry, but not to rule the country.
Strong industry is eventually what created jobs paying the equivalent of $20 to $30 per hour to workers who had never gone to college, they just developed some skills.
These workers were able to buy houses, cars and put their kids through college. Originally, opposition to this kind of industrialism came from our old enemy, the British empire.
They didn't want us to make our own stuff, so that they could sell us their cheap goods produced by slaves in India. They didn't want us exporting manufactured goods, to compete with them, they just wanted raw materials harvested by our slaves, which they sold to us.
Opposition to industrial capitalism still exists today in forms such as Marxism or environmentalism, but if you trace the history or even contemporary structure of these organization, you can trace them back to our old enemy, English banks and their Wall Street underlings.
Oh my! You just try to remind people of some simple truth and everybody wants to go all scholarly on your butt.
Good tactic I guess I mean if he spent all that time in engineering and math how could he have taken that many history classes right?
You guys are right, my strength is in modern history, I just grabbed some stuff out of wiki to make a point. Parties do end.
I do believe that the basic conflict between the two parties centered around workers rights, I am trusting wiki a little here, but, what the hey, I haven’t done a proof in a while.
I propose that the modern Democratic Party is more friendly towards workers rights that the current Republican Party.
There I’ve said it, anyone want to attack?
No attack, just a discussion. I think the modern Democratic party should be more friendly to worker's rights, but unfortunately, they are almost as bought out by Wall Street as the Republicans.
but all the world is in that word "almost" in this case, like we almost did something about climate change in 2000, but we didn't
I'm no expert on politicians, but I only know of a handful of "good" democratic representatives. I'm thinking of Kucinich and some others. From what I hear, there are some good ones among the republicans also.
I think for the last five decades though, the bad ones have generally over ruled the good ones and have taken our country into an obvious and massive decline.
Now, I believe we are on the verge of complete destruction, by starting a war with Iran, that would spread to Russia and China, which have stated they would defend Iran if attacked.
This is all due to the process of corruption, as if it were business as usual, up to the point at which now, if we continue, we will destroy ourselves.
Which are those "good" republicans you speak of, I didn't think there were any left.
You might want to look at Gore, and think we could of had him instead of Bush, that's a good place to start.
Thanks for the suggestion, but I have some objections to environmentalism. I think America's biggest problem today is economic, a lack of economic development.
Now, of course it is a good idea to have a clean environment, but good ideas can also be turned against people and used as weapons. I think environmentalism has been used in this way to hinder our economic development.
burnin' down the house
OUR house!
burnin' down the house
Gore rolled over and played dead. Had he put up a fight he still might have lost but the world would probably still be a different place.
And if Nader had stayed off the FL ballot it would not have mattered, of course why not take the gamble; you're only talking about the planets future.
The fact remains that Gore won the election and won in Florida. The election was stolen by the Supremes . Gore and the Democrats rolled over. Whether Nader was right or wrong this is still the fact. Gore was put to the test and he failed.
so was Nader, and he failed too, and all that voted for him
Perhaps. the difference is that Gore really aspired to be the most powerful person on earth. When put to the test he did fail. To me it puts into question just how different things might have been with Gore. Sadly we'll never know.
reminds me that no man is an inland, and none of us do this alone, but hey people see the same thing, and yet see different things
Clinton was bombing people. Obama has bombed six nation in three years after recieving a peace prize.
It would have been no different. Its all a rigged game to keep ya feeling like it could have been. It wouldn't. Obama is proving it every day.
You need to forget that shit and realize that we are all being played, and we deserve it.
The unanswerable question would be whether there may have been more bombs, more hungry people, fiercer police state with the republicans than with the democrats. I agree it's not much of a choice and I personally decline my "right to vote."
I applaud your ability to take your emotions out of what is a very emotional discussion- politics
[Removed]
Get rid of the Democrats as well!
again...if only they would make me King, damn it!!!
BLASPHEMY! . . . . . . . . . . . . well not really........
You should get rid of the Republicans and the Dems. Theyve been in power for 100 years and are horribly corrupted.
Man this country is freakin stupid!
one at a time....one at a time...
That type of apathy is exactly what has gotten us into this mess. And exactly why we arent even close to getting any real change
No voting for Nader is what got us in this mess, what were you born yesterday or something?
Go vote for another warmongering party.
Ps- they both are, and only a jackass cant see through their bullshit. If Clinton and the Dems, along with the R, hadnt repealed Glass Steagall., there would be no housing bubble. Man you are a partisan hack. You should go work for the MSM.
So you're going to declare the office vacant, right? What can I expect from a troll?
Vacant? Your ability to assume the dumbest meanings in what should be a good conversation continue to amaze me.
Didnt like that Glass Steagall blast, did ya? Well, most at OccupyTampa (not speaking for them) agree that this is a two party problem, and neither is ever going to change.
Where are you from again?
Listen this is bigger than me, or you, but yes I have the audacity to think that if we move quickly we can crush the Republican Party upon the rocks that they have turned their followers heads into, and if we do that,we rule, it's that's simple!
And then you are still stuck with the establishment, because they fund BOTH parties.
Keep dreaming of a day where the Democratic party actually gives a shit about you.
It's about what you can do for your country, not the other way round.
That statement is completely against everything you stand for. By endorsing these warmongering, corrupted parties, you are only hurting future generations.
this from the same person that was just whinning about how the party don't do enough for him?
you must be hoping nobody's reading I guess, what nonsense
if only they would make me King, damn it!!
[Removed]
We should get rid of both republican partys.
but we can only do that one at a time, so I say let's get rid of the ones that self indentfy first, and when their gone we go after the rest
[Removed]
[Removed]
Factsrfun, what happened to you? Has your account become a bot?
I don't believe we've met, and you are?
Are you saying you want the GOP to live forever?
I don't.
Nice try. Way to put words in my mouth. No, I don't want neither the GOP nor the GNC to live forever. |
Who are you? Oh right, someone who is pandering for votes for the GNC... No thanks, I won't be persuaded into buying into the bullshit of the two party system anymore.
guess you'll be sitting this one out
hope you enjoyed your time in the park
What happened I thought this was OWS
oh let me help you catch up
OWS is about wealth inequality and money in politics
OWS is a movement designed to affect public policy for the propose of addressing these issues
the Republican Party stands as an obstacle to implementing these policies
therefore all who truly support our goals of OWS will be working our asses off getting rid of all the Republicans they can this November
Any questions?
I agree the republicans are a problem but so aren't the dems the unions pump more money into our political system than even the corporations and OWS has allied itself with the Unions your stated goals won't be achieved by merely electing dems.
no the goals are made possible by getting rid of Republicans, that does mean supportting Ds, but that is only part of the job
[Removed]