Skip to content

Pseudo-left groups step up promotion of Sanders and the Democrats [WordVirus]

October 25, 2015

This brings up an interesting point, and one I’m really torn on.

On the one hand, Sanders is bringing in long-overdue recognition of some genuinely “progressive” issues. Better yet, he is helping get rid of the annoying neologism that is “progressive”. Socialism is a perfectly good word, and we’re not so stupid that we are unable to differentiate between “stalinist workers paradise” and a system which actively counteracts the accumulation of wealth, recognizing both the great benefits brought about by property rights and the capitalist system, and the great abuses brought about by the same. Having to constantly use a euphemism like “progressive” is a little nuisance, I like the word socialist, in the sense it is used when we make stereotypes of the things that Scandinavian countries do right. So Go Bernie just for taking that word back from the McCarthyist prison it’s been in for half a century. Is he the perfect candidate? Not hardly, but miles better than Hillary.

Is he the best candidate? Actually, no. And this is the heartbreaking part. He is clearly playing the part of the “sheepdog” in the primaries, a-la Dennis Kucinich in the 2004/2008  for instance — someone to keep the Democratic party’s left from drifting away. Honestly, I don’t think the Democratic party deserves to retain anyone who identifies themselves as progressive, let alone socialist or egalitarian. I was kindof hoping it would split in two, but instead it seems the Republican party is going to fall apart first.

Below is an article going into detail on the view that whatever movement Sanders is creating is being coopted by the usual sold-out-to-the-highest-bidder forces of the Democratic party machine. It’s a touch dogmatic, and very critical, but brings up valid points for me:


I should add that despite this, I am still supporting Sanders, since (1) he has a big enough audience that he is advancing and legitimizing discussion of a compromise by those who benefit from “wealth creation”, in consideration of those who are shortchanged by the process or are left out entirely. And (2) he would make a much better president than Clinton.

From → Uncategorized

Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: