Can a group as fractious as DU agree on what the Democratic Party should stand for?

[jpgray]

I say yes, and I bet I can show it with a few quotes from only one Democrat:

Competition has been shown to be useful up to a certain point and no further, but cooperation, which is the thing we must strive for today, begins where competition leaves off.

Human kindness has never weakened the stamina or softened the fiber of a free people. A nation does not have to be cruel to be tough.

I believe that in every country the people themselves are more peaceably and liberally inclined than their governments.

In our personal ambitions we are individualists. But in our seeking for economic and political progress as a nation, we all go up or else all go down as one people.

It isn't sufficient just to want - you've got to ask yourself what you are going to do to get the things you want.

Selfishness is the only real atheism; aspiration, unselfishness, the only real religion.

The test of our progress is not whether we add to the abundance of those who have much. It is whether we provide enough to those who have little.

But while they prate of economic laws, men and women are starving. We must lay hold of the fact that economic laws are not made by nature. They are made by human beings.

[greyl]

1. I'll go with no.

Not a horrible thing, really. Big Tent and all.

That "Selfishness is the only real atheism" quote bothers me, for example.

[jpgray]

2. Seems to me you are ignoring the second half of the quote

While religious DUers will likely ignore the first half, and also get upset. Ah, DU! What a lovely place.

[greyl]

3. I see how you could think that, but no.

Even though the second half is somewhat anti-religion, it doesn't make up for how the first half conflates atheism with the lousy value of selfishness.

[jpgray]

4. I think the point is that we have false ideas of what religion truly is--but you proved your point!

:D I suppose there will always be a nit to pick concerning -anything- posted on DU, and in a way that's great.

[greyl]

12. ... and then of course we've immediately alienated the devoted Faithful among us. ;) nt

[jpgray]

13. Maybe this thread meets expectations, but in a different way than I intended

A constant questioning of authority seems healthy enough to me.

[NewJeffCT]

5. For a few years now, I've had a sig line that quoted Will Rogers

from the 1920s - "I'm not a member of an organized political party - I'm a Democrat."

it has not changed.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

6. i just dont understand how greed and hatred can be a better uniter

that social justice and economic justice can.

ie: why the republican party is more organized/motivated/unified than us.

[jpgray]

8. Quid pro quo mass marketing combined with apathy work really, really well.

Witness progressive policies being immensely popular while progressive candidates are marginalized and die at the ballot the box. Make campaigns an image PR race and avoid fair coverage of the issues, and you can hide subjectivity in the media fairly easily.

[Romulox]

9. The Republicans are more honest with themselves about their values

It's hard to claim to be for the "little guy" while pursuing a big money agenda. The Republicans make no such claims.

[LSdemocrat]

15. The problem is that we can't agree on what "social justice and economic justice" mean

Whereas there really isn't much to define if you believe in "every man for himself".

[L. Coyote]

7. How about "ALL of US" and ALL of USA

In sharp contrast to the party of the Corps

[Brazenly Liberal]

10. I hope not!

It's by debating and testing ideas that we grow. Metooism is for Republicans. They call it unity, but it's really rigidity and it's breaking them.

[madokie]

11. the Democratic Party must continue to stand with her constituents, us, no matter what

we change as we go through life facing each day's new dilemma's

[RiverStone]

14. probably not...

Even more importantly, can Dems on The Hill agree?

I'm clueless what our elected ones define as Democratic. Case in point, that crazy 92-3 vote authorizing another 150 billion for shrub's war.

The lines between blue and red blur more with each passing week the war and the war enablers march on...

[derby378]

16. That line about demonizing atheism ain't gonna fly

I'm not an atheist, but my wife is, and some of my best friends are. Might want to rethink that a little...

[SergeyDovlatov]

17. Absolutely. Fundamentals rarely change. It is only our tolerance

for how far politicians can stray from them that is different among us.

[Selatius]

18. Historically, no.

The Democratic Party has ultimately acted really more like a coalition of disparate interest groups than anything else. The glue that holds the coalition together is the fact that in our political system, the tendency is for only two political parties to become viable at any one time. This is the nature of single-member district plurality voting. (SMDP system) Otherwise, if the US adopted a multi-party system, the Democratic Party would disintegrate quickly.

It takes immensely strong individuals to force the party to adopt major policies through internal partisan warfare. Only LBJ and FDR were powerful enough to strong-arm through major economic programs and reforms. Nobody else has come close.