You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Is the Democratic Party about to be radicalized? [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
happydreams Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-05-05 05:12 PM
Original message
Is the Democratic Party about to be radicalized?
Advertisements [?]
Its just a feeling I get. People are showing their outrage more and more at BOTH parties at their inability/unwillingness to get tough on these blatantly corrupt bastards that have stolen the government. Many of those who are blowing the whistle on the fascists are conservatives in name. Wilkerson's interview on McNeil Lehrer snooze hour last night really hammered the "cabal". I have never seen a better Newshour than that one, a more coherent and harder hitting criticism of Bush by anybody on either side of the aisle. Many of the early whistleblowers were Repugs as well. Yet, we have the democrats wimping and waffling as the standard MO.

WTF is going on???

I think that Neo-liberalism is the fundamental problem that goes a long way to explaining this weirdness. For instance Bill Clinton and GHW Bush were, or are, both members of the Trilateral Commission which is a think tank and advocate of neo-liberalism, free trade, BS. Sometimes I think that the Repugs are the shock troops that advance a resource grab, like Iraq and then the dems come in to quell the dissent. Why for instance does Bill Clinton and other dems treat Hugo Chavez like a doormat? I get the sense that Chavez will be treated the same way should a democrat win the White House, though maybe not with threats of invasion and subterfuge. What gets me is that Kerry and others said he wants to "win" in Iraq. What does that mean?

Neo-liberalism is rooted in an expansionist mentality and it has come down to utter disaster. It doesn't work anymore, we have to start playing a different game or we will just go the way of all other empires in history. Maybe people are starting to realize this.


No doubt we have the ability. It seems reasonable that we could develop alternatives to fossil fuels, the technology is there, even the businesses are established marketing alternatives like wind, solar etc. What if we had put the 300 billion + we are spending in Iraq on oil we aren't going to get and spent it on solarizing 20 million US homes? But the problem is the fossil fuel and nuke power interests are not going to go quietly into the night and are adept at keeping alternatives from restricted.

Just some thoughts. Please comment
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC