Third Party & Independents Archives

Hear Hear!

It’s largely about education, and the majority of voters are going to get their education one way or another.

The question is, will it be sooner or later?

At any rate, the voters have the government that the voters elect (and re-elect, and re-elect, and re-elect , … , at least until that finally becomes too painful).

d.a.n,

Yes, I wish I had thought about the educational component of such groups for the article. They are powerful educators, many of them. NAACP, World Wildlife Fund, ACLU, and Planned Parenthood come to mind as examples of influential groups which have educated and attracted sufficient numbers of persons to create a lasting effect on our nation’s governance, and social and cultural values.

Good Post, thanks for the list.

Thanks, Gergle.

Great post, wonderful sites! Thanks David

You’re welcome, Mike, and thank you.

I was raised in the family where my Father often said, “you can’t fight City Hall”. Well you know what, he was wrong. I am actively involved in a community group, and we have fought City Hall and won.

The city has learned that they need to listen to us. We have learned that you don’t have to fight city hall if you get involve with city processes early enough.

We as an organization has had to educate ourselves on the many aspects of city government, from budgetary processes to redevelopment plans. Many of us are now on city commissions, and despite what we have accomplished we need to do more. The one good thing is now we are doing it in a more productive and positive manner.

It is difficult to get more people involved. With families, work and other obligations, who has the time to shift through the volumes of city documents? But shift we do, because we wish to keep informed.

Though my dealings with the City, I have come in contact with many different types of groups. I would encourage everyone to be involved. Government doesn’t work well, when only a few people are making the decisions.

Thank you David for your post.

Cube, you are welcome.

And thank you for sharing your experience and advice about “City Hall”. You are right, bureaucracies can be forced to change direction, but, only at the cost of citizens getting educated and involved.

I have done similarly in forcing a major insurance company to quit working hourly employees overtime without pay. Took months and months of wrangling, but I and a handful of other brave employees got the company to cease and desist from the their illegal practice, without any of us being fired.

On another occasion, I was drafted and elected president of our Homeowner’s Assn. and together, we home owners took over the Assn. from the Developer who had everything rigged in their favor, and not ours. Took some attorneys (who sued each other eventually over it, and a lot seat of the pants self-education, but we did it.

On neither occasion did I believe we would be successful in our attempts. Just seemed to daunting. But, it was the right thing to do, regardless of whether we were successful or not. Turned out, we were.

I have lost a battle here and there, too, but, the wins sustain the justified and warranted efforts.

Cube said, ” Government doesn’t work well, when only a few people are making the decisions.”
So true, We need the numbers to go up against them like David and d.a.n. have been saying and doing for years it’s not always just about getting your own bread buttered.

David

I am glad you mentioned that you have lost a few battles. I fortunately was on the “winning” side on the first few issues we took up with our city, however that hasn’t always held true since.

In many instances governance is about compromise, and while initially that was a bitter pill to swallow, I have since become acquainted with many compassionate people who I respectfully disagree with.

Rodney

I had a conversation with our Congressman once, who unfortunately told me he only had to keep the support of 10 percent of the voters in his district. Then by splitting the difference he can keep winning reelections. When voting turnout is only around 30%, his ten percent becomes 33% of the people that actually votes. When he splits the difference, he wins by a landslide.

Rodney,

You hit the nail on the head. Incumbents operate under the gratuitously false belief that the taxes the people of their state pays into the federal government should be returned to their state from the federal government as close to dollar for dollar as they can possibly appropriate federal dollars.

This concept is what makes nearl ALL incumbents highly irresponsible and incompetent in managing this nation’s affairs, present and future. If the money paid into the federal government were spent ONLY on Constitutionally required obligations of the federal government, as opposed to state and local pork projects of NO CONSEQUENCE to the health and well being of the nation as a whole, we would likely not have a national debt higher than about 2 trillion dollars today.

Our politicians in Congress and White House have this group think mindset that each state has an obligation to bankrupt the federal appropriations process as fast as possible as long as those who voted for them are convinced they are benefiting from those appropriations. It is idiocy, it is destroying our economic future, it is incredibly destructive thinking by those in D.C. which each supports in each other with a wink and a nod.

Only the voters can put a stop to this group think in D.C. by refusing to reelect the incumbents participating in this group think. And that is pretty near all of them.

DR
“So, what group should you join? What are your interests for social, cultural, or governmental change? There is likely a group already in place waiting to welcome your voice and support toward effecting that change. As an individual without great wealth, your voice has no volume, and will not be heard over the din of others. Your choice is simple, become a billionaire, join a group, or, resign yourself to having no influence whatsoever over the direction of social, cultural, or governmental affairs. “

Well put. Its a truism in politics that the wealthy MUST control the government. Its a class imperitive, like fish need water. The US is fortunately a place where individuals of normal means are allowed to network with others to also have some measure of input regarding public policy. Some groups you did not mention are those big bad political parties. Every county has a central committee and monthly meetings. Often there are opening to serve as a committee member or alternate. It is also possible to run for the position in an election without a great cost. Most often one will be accepted with open arms. Its a good idea to brush up on Roberts Rules before trying to get involved. The real work happens on the sub-committees. You might want to help prepare position papers for adoption on local, state and national issues on one committee. Other committees are charged with interviewing candidates seeking endorsement. You get to actually ask questions and seek commitment from politicians. Usually part of membership is attendance at state conventions. Again the work is done in sub-committees or caucuses and you can effect the platform,you can push issues forward. The contacts that can be made are also important. When dealing with officials you become more than just one more constituient to appease. Your calls go through.
It takes patience and can be frustrating. Just because you believe something is important does not mean everyone else does.Its not fast, but a good idea is a good idea and along the way you can meet some really interesting and involved people that refuse to not make a difference.

bills, thanks.

My problem with that process of shaping policy inside a political party is that being in the party shapes you in the process as well, and not necessarily in positive ways, from my vantage point. Becoming an ideologue is one of the great hazards of joining a political party. To get anything out of being an active party insider, one has to avoid the appearance of holding individual ideas or opinions that do not tow the party line. Overtime, due to cognitive dissonance and the persistent threat of being judged as not a true party loyalist, one can actually become one without ever being aware of what one gave up along the way, like reason, fact, and reality without spin, a jaundiced eye, or rationalization.

My biggest problem with political parties however, is that they, by definition, must subordinate any and all beliefs and agendas to the one superordinate goal of a political party, winning elections and getting reelected. That fact is why after decades of insufferable and intolerable government failing at the hands of wealthy special interests and lobbyists, they are more numerous and more influential than ever before.

The only force in the universe that can force elected politicians to make the nation’s and public’s interests override the wealthy special and lobbyist interests, is a very strong anti-incumbent sentiment by large numbers of voters. And even that is not guaranteed, if the current state of the GOP is any indication. (Though there are a few signs a few Republicans in Congress are beginning to absorb the lesson of the last two elections.)

DR
One of the positions I pushed in my experience with the Dems in N. California was not part of the party line. I am one of those rare 2nd amendment Democrats. The position was not especially popular but the message I helped deliver was pretty simple, if we really want to prevent crime the best way to do it is to work toward economic justice,to create jobs with decent pay,protect and improve the safety net, and more importantly,jobs with hope,and we can’t do that by throwing away blue collar votes by supporting inefectual and silly gun control laws that feed into the rights fear mongering. As you know, that message was picked up nationally and is one reason the Dems mananged to gain seats in traditionally Rep regions.Of course I was one of many,but I am a bit proud of my contribution and yes,winning does count. If one wants to have an effect then the group chosen should at least have a chance of actually gaining some political power. Otherwise you might as well take up basket weaving.

bills, I am with you on the 2nd. A.

Yes, the path to minimizing most kinds of crime is a healthy population working, progressing, and saving for their future plans, which don’t include incarceration, or hiding from the law.

Yes, winning is important in terms of acquiring power to make changes to an otherwise less than optimal system. However, winning cannot be allowed to become the overarching superordinate goal. If it does, as it has with both the duopoly parties, then their so called principles and values become horribly compromised, due to winning used as a blackmail card to force extraordinary anti-national and anti-public welfare measures in the favor of blackmailers.

The current banking reforms are an epitomal example of the compromises which have been forced upon Democrats in the White House and Congress. No relief or justice for those already gouged into lifetime of indebtedness at the hands of the credit card issuing oligopoly, which can, and does, exert enormous campaign dollar pressure at election time.

I know one group that is taking a beatdown because of the Clinton/Bush/Obama outsource American jobs policy.

We got to bailout ( provide taxpayer funds for factory closings here and to startup new ones abroad) these manufacturers and save all those jobs.

See the USA in your Chevrolet
It’s made in China just for you…

The Independent Progressive Politics Network (IPPN)

http://www.ippn.org/node

jlw, that is just about the most twisted and convoluted logic I have seen in a long time.

Had GM been gone into bankruptcy court without the American people as the major shareholder and without the 10’s of billions it received, vastly more working Americans would have been out of work, and for much longer.

Those are American soil jobs being saved. All attempts to equate the Obama administration’s and this Congress’ efforts to keep GM employees employed as well as the thousands employed supplying goods and services to GM, with the gross mismanagement of GM prior to January, is just plain bunk and bull.

And the IPPN doesn’t seem to have an inkling of what a federal budget or fiscal responsibility is. I respect their values. I condemn their complete and abject abandonment of any and all other considerations and priorities in their headlong attempts to further indebt this nation on social spending we can’t afford at this particular point in time.

Putting the word Independent in front of their name doesn’t lessen their far left liberal wing positions and priorities. They may be independent of the Democratic Party, but, they are absolutely tied to it, as well.

Thank you for volunteering the link though. Like I said, I respect their values and objectives, but not to the exclusion of all other considerations and circumstances requiring attention and federal dollars at this time.

David R., I was comparing the retoric ( we have to save the jobs) before the bailout with the reality of now. At least another 20 factories closed, at least another 20,000 jobs lost. Yes, there will still be a GM and they will keep a few assembly plants here but, most of the jobs are already on their way out of this country.

They came for the non-union factory workers but I wasn’t a non-union factory worker. they came for the union factory worker….

Better them and theirs than the rest of us!

Heaven forbid we have a depression because then the rest of us might feel the pain and we might have to get mad as hell and do something more than just sending an email to our bedit in Washington.

I did not compare the Obama Administration with the pathetic management at GM, most of who still have their jobs. I did compare the Obama Administration to the Clinton and Bush Administrations. IMO, the shoe is begining to fit remarkably well.

jlw, appears you view the glass half-empty, and I half-full.

You believe manufacturing in America is dying. I see Wall St. singing a very different tune, as well as some economic indicators that manufacturing estimates last fall were exaggerated and manufacturing is coming back.

My major concern rests with the Chinese Auto plant gearing up just across the Mexican border. I am NOT concerned about Chinese made cars made in China competing with American cars after the costs of shipping, and meeting US Auto standards are added to low labor wage cost of their production.

If Obama and Congress have a lick of sense, they will put in place measures to BAN those Mexican made Chinese cars, and in a very big darn hurry.

An enormous part of the losses by the US Auto manufactures, and most foreign for that matter, has been the financial crises and global recession, creating a staggering drop in demand in the course of 16 months.

That will of course, improve in synch. with the abatement of the recession, beginning in 2010. Which leaves the issue of management of American auto manufacturers. Ford sales are coming back stronger than anyone expected by this time in 2009. Management quality is what will make or break Chrysler and GM going forward.

Of course, you are right about a depression. But, that is very much more remote a possibility over the next couple years than it was just 6 months ago.

The Bush and Clinton administrations did not take the bad management situation by the horns. Obama did. I just don’t see your correlation. I am enormously impressed with the Obama administration’s opening the door and kicking GM management in the pants on their way through that door into bankruptcy proceedings. Obama’s admin could have gone the other way, and tried to use public dollars to keep GM out of bankruptcy court. That of course, would have been an enormously more costly mistake. One Clinton might have made. And Bush likely would never have attempted to keep GM afloat for restructuring in the first place using tax dollars, dramatically exacerbating the recession and unemployment situation and retarding the recover significantly. Bush favored bank and Wall St. workers, not blue collar auto and parts makers.

DR
“They may be independent of the Democratic Party, but, they are absolutely tied to it, as well. “

You are making assumptions. If you look at their affiliates you will see their ties to the Green Party. You don’t get to give them to us Dems. They are part of your third party platoon and you can have them.

A bit off thread but I would hope that we see some protection for employees soon regarding corporate bankruptcy. Fixed pension obligations should be on the short list of things companies cannot go bankrupt on. If not the federal pension garantee is going to be yet another huge drag on taxpayers.

bills, YES! I do get to give them to you Dems, in the same way I give the Libertarians to the GOP. That is how they vote. They will take money from wherever they can raise it. But, their membership votes Democratic, regardless of what label the most of them put in front of their organization.

They are part of the problem, not the solution, as long as they help elect incumbents by party at a rate of 90+% per election. No change in the majority of personnel in Congress means no change in the way America is governed nor direction in which we are lurching.

Progressives vote Democratic. No assumptions required. The research and polling data empirically evidence the fact that progressives vote Democratic. Thanks for the defensive reply though!

DR
So their affiliate list and all the Green Party associations is just a lie?

Very true. It is just that simple. One person alone can barely do anything.

“So their affiliate list and all the Green Party associations is just a lie?”

-bills at June 4, 2009 01:00 AM
No, not at all. As a Green I am familiar with this organization and they are very Green friendly. However, what I think David R Remer meant was that a lot of the people that visit those sites and give them money end up voting for Democrats. So while the people that are running it are Green friendly many of their supporters still vote for Democratic candidates (unfortunately, in my opinion).