Reply #149: both are bad

[Two Americas]

That is interesting eridani, thanks. I think that trashing out the political movements from the 60's is much, much worse than criticizing our modern liberal activist organizations, and much more in alignment with the Republicans, who have built their political fortunes on reaction to the 60's for the last 40 years and are still fighting those battles.

Moveon.org and other modern liberal organizations are no threat to the right wingers and their clients - the wealthy and powerful few. Hell, they are "working within the system" and becoming "winners," and they appeal to a very narrow demographic. Modern liberal organizations should be criticized, in my opinion, as they are the key barrier to the political left. Most modern liberalism is libertarianism with an "organic" label slapped on it.

Surrendering on the causes of the 60's, however, is a complete surrender to the right wing. This is interesting, because we had the same arguments in the 60's - the new movement: SDS, the Yippies, and other groups ascending over the old school Labor fighters from the 30's. I made the same argument then that I am making today, and I was correct back then. The modern and new organizations, just like the Obama campaign - made up of younger people and tossing away the past, "transcending the old divisiveness of the past" had no political staying power, were more of a fad, and quickly collapsed and all of the "radicals" got corporate jobs and moved to suburbia. Labor and civil rights people were left in the lurch, the young radicals abandoned the fight, and the right wing has been growing in power ever since.

Bringing more people into politics and registering new voters is a good thing, a very good thing. We shall see if that was solely for the purpose of helping Obama win the nomination, which there is much evidence of, or if it has broader political significance. I don't know one way or the other yet, but talking to Obama staffers, who brag about their clever strategy for winning the nomination - as opposed to making any important and lasting political impact - it sounds much more like the former than the latter.

The reason that the Republican theme of "elitist" has worked is because there is so much truth to it - the left and liberalism have become increasingly elitist over the last few decades - arrogant, condescending, upscale. That is the not the strongest Republican theme, it is our greatest weakness and flaw.

I agree with you about the "3 am" ad and fear mongering - that to me is playing into the Republicans greatest strength right there. But as near as I can tell, Obama is 90% of the way there as far as reinforcing the right wing "war" theme - even calling what is happening a "war" is s strong reinforcement of the right wing propaganda.