Archive for the ‘Progressives’ Category

Will Progressives Only Talk To Themselves? – HuffPost

As Trump stumbles, and maybe crumbles, progressives are confronting a painful truth: Trump is a reflection of a much bigger problem the rise of runaway inequality and the failure of the liberal establishment to address it.

Between 1980 and 2014, the gap between the top 100 CEOs and the average worker climbed from $40 to one to an incredible $844 to one. All boats did not rise. During that time the real income of the average worker (after accounting for inflation) actually declined. Both Republicans and Democrats alike rushed to deregulate Wall Street, which is a major cause of these enormous gaps.

The Democrats, who once spoke for these working people, are in real danger of losing them. Since 2008, they have given up 917 state, local and federal elected offices. There are now 33 Republic governorships.

In workshops around the country, weve been asking participants why Trump won. The answers primarily focus on the Comey letter, Hillary as a poor candidate, the Russian hacking, anti-establishment protest, homophobia, racism, xenophobia, and so on..

In no instance is there any self-reflection from progressives about our own role in any of this. Isnt it possible that maybe, just maybe, the enormous rightward drift has something to do with us with how progressives are organized and disorganized? At the very least, we should admit the obvious: all of this happened and continues to happen on our watch. To not take some responsibility for this growing calamity is to concede that we have no agency, no power, and no effective strategy to forge meaningful social change.

The Hazards of Silo Organizing

For the last generation, progressives have organized themselves into issue silos, each with its own agenda. Survival depends on fundraising (largely from private foundations) based on the uniqueness of ones own silo. Each group must develop its own expertise and activities which distinguish it from other groups. Each needs to proclaim that its issue is the existential threat, be it climate change, police violence, abortion rights or health care. The net result of this Darwinian struggle is a fractured landscape of activity. The creativity, talent and skill are there in abundance, but the coherence and common purpose among groups is not.

Siloed organizational structures also make it extremely difficult to cooperate on a common program to reverse runaway inequality, There is little incentive to form a grand progressive alliance to build what the Sanders campaign, for example, had set in motion. Better to launch your own national effort and claim that it is the center of the organizing universe.

It is therefore not surprising that the two biggest progressive challenges to runaway inequality in the last decade Occupy Wall Street and the Sanders campaign did not arise from within these siloed organizations. OWS largely grew from a notice in Adbusters, a Vancouver, BC, journal. Most of those who did the occupying at the 900 encampments also did not come from progressive siloed organizations. In fact, the non-profit/NGO community more or less watched from the sidelines.

Similarly, the Sanders campaign also did not emerge from a concerted effort among progressives to create a new politics within the Democratic Party. Rather, it was driven by Bernies own social-democratic vision that he had been espousing for over 40 years, year after year after year. When his effort showed signs of life, progressives broadly divided between the idealists feeling the burn and the pragmatists seeking to back a sure winner, who at least would provide access to progressive ideas.

The advent of Trump certainly has unleashed an enormous amount of progressive activity. In addition to the many sizeable marches, there are now approximately 5,000 Indivisible groups making life miserable for Republican office holders. However, nearly all of this activity is anti-Trump and defensive. There is no common Indivisible national agenda, nor is there a common organization to set a coherent strategic direction.

More importantly, pure anti-Trumpism guarantees we will be talking to the already convinced. By focusing solely on Trump, it becomes next to impossible to reach the Trump voters who also voted for Sanders and Obama.

Some argue that such outreach is a waste of time because there really are not that many Obama-to-Sanders-to-Trump voters. Unfortunately, exit polls do not give us enough data to reasonably estimate the size of this hybrid voting population. But sources inside the United Steelworkers, for example, report that 50 percent of their members who voted, voted for Trump. Given how representative those members are of the broader working class, were probably looking at several million Obama-Sanders-Trump voters.

We do know this: In the state of Michigan there was a 500,000 vote loss from Obama (2012) to Clinton (2016). It was minus 290,000 in Pennsylvania and minus 222,000 in Wisconsin.

Very few, if any of our siloed progressive organizations are targeting these working people. Danger ahead.

It will not be easy for progressive to reach out to Trump voters, unionized or not. In part, that is because anti-Trump defensive activity has become the basis for a new wave of silo organizing and fundraising. Each group is claiming that its activities will be the most effective means for upending the Trump agenda and returning Congress to the Democrats.

The animosity towards Trump voters runs deep. One prominent progressive educator told me privately that Trump voters should be viewed as terrorists that their anti-establishment revolt was like throwing a grenade into a crowd, and were the collateral damage. Others argue that the Trump voters really are deplorables when it comes to their racism, sexism and anti-immigrant beliefs.

The suspicion also spreads to those who do want to reach out to these Obama-Sanders-Trump voters. They are often criticized for favoring class over race for failing to put anti-racism as the central feature of all organizing and educational efforts. So for example, if addressing white skin privilege is not a major part of the education, then the education is viewed as catering to the racist white working class.

This can cascade into a series of litmus tests on race, gender, immigration, abortion, global warming, etc that must be passed in order to be welcomed into the progressive community. While there is no denying that these issues are of critical importance, the net effect of administering such tests is that progressives will be stuck within their own bubbles.

Were facing a moment of truth about education and social change. We need to decide whether or not we believe that real education about big picture issues can make a difference in how people see the world. This kind of education is not the same as campaign propaganda, sound bite memes or technical training about how to get out the vote or organize an action. Its about building a broad-based discussion on how the economy works and doesnt work, and how to make it serve us all. Here are some of its features:

1. Placing a Target on Wall Street: By showing how and why society is growing more unequal, runaway inequality education (see runawayinequality.org) lays bare the ways in which Wall Street and its CEO partners engage in financial strip-mining, the immoral siphoning away of wealth from our jobs, communities and families. The weapons of financial engineering are many including mortgage fraud, high interest student loans, stock buybacks, payday loans, too big to fail/jail, bailouts, tax loopholes, tax breaks, off-shore accounts, privatization of public assets, and many, many more. None of our silos are immune from ravages of financial strip-mining

2. Building Common Ground: Big picture education can tie together virtually all the issues that we care deeply about. Runaway inequality and runaway finance are linked to runaway global warming. The forces causing runaway inequality are connected to the rise of the prison population and the expansion of private prisons where we now warehouse millions of our impoverished youth. Its tied to the attack on union rights, the decline of good paying jobs, the harassment of immigrants and the failure of our corporate-run health care system. This educational process helps us see that our issue silos are in fact deeply connected.

3. Safe space for Dialogue: A strong educational process provides an excellent venue to have dialogue with those that do not immediately share every progressive value or position. Ive done runaway inequality workshops with Trump voters and the response has been positive. They too want to understand why the richest country in the history of the world cannot provide decent paying jobs and adequate public services for all its people.

4. Developing and Spreading a Common Agenda: Such an educational process also leads naturally to testing and sharing a common agenda to reverse runaway inequality. Such an agenda, in the form of a petition, can serve as an educational tool, and, if it catches on, a way to shift the public debate towards a social-democratic agenda. (See here for national polling results on how young people reacted to such an agenda.)

Learning from the Populists of the late 19th Century

Over a century ago, small farmers, black and white, in the Midwest and South organized a potent mass movement to challenge the power of Wall Street. They called for cooperative enterprises, public banks, public ownership of railroads and telegraph, a progressive income tax and many other limits on corporate power. Their agenda led to many state and nation reforms as well as paving the way for the New Deal and its tight controls on Wall Street.

The key to their organizational successes was education. They fielded 6,000 educators to help build their chapters and spread the word in the 1880s and 1890s. Today we would need about 30,000 to do the same, given the growth of our population.

Building such a network, however, requires having faith in the power of education. It requires that we understand that runaway inequality ties us all together and can only be tackled through a broad-based common movement with a common agenda. This educational process asks us to have the confidence and courage to engage in dialogue with a wide range of people who also care about building a better society for themselves and their families.

None of this will come easy. Our silos provide us with strength. We take pride in our identities and are empowered by them. Also, it is very difficult for us to even imagine what a common movement might look like, let alone how to build one. But we can be sure of one thing: Building a fairer and more just society will require a massive educational movement. As the Populists taught us, it can be done.

(For those willing to take that leap, please join us in building the runawayinequality.org educational network. We need you. We need each other.)

Les Leopold, the director of the Labor Institute, is currently working with labor unions and community organizations to build the runawayinequality.org educational network. His book Runaway Inequality: An Activist Guide to Economic Justice serves as a text for this educational campaign. All proceeds go to support these educational efforts.

The rest is here:
Will Progressives Only Talk To Themselves? - HuffPost

Progressives Plan National ‘March for Truth,’ Demand Independent … – Breitbart News

SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER

The coordinated rallies are callingfor an independent commission to investigate alleged collusion between the Trump administration and Russia, investigate whether Russia interfered with the 2016 elections, and call for President Trump to release his tax returns.

Part of a press release for the event states:

The firing of FBI Director Comey, bombshell news of memos that suggest Donald Trump attempted to influence an active FBI investigation, Senate testimony from John Brennan, Sally Yates and James Clapper, and revelations about the Trump administrations handling of information that Mike Flynn was compromised further underscore the need for urgent, well-resourced investigations. As Representative Elijah Cummings noted last week, this investigation represents a fight for the soul of our democracy.

The march organizers stated that they have several simple demands:

Congressional Representatives include Jerry Nadler (D-NY), Nydia Velasquez (D-NY), Brad Sherman (D-CA, Mike Quigley (D-IL), Al Green (D-TX), Robin Kelly (D-IL), Jamie Raskin (D-MD), and Donald McEachin (D-VA) are reportedly among politicians attending the rallies. Watergate prosecutor Jill Wine-Banks will also attend, in addition to tyranny expert Timothy Snyder, and progressive political commentator Sally Kohn. Leftist Sharia law advocate Linda Sarsour andHamilton star Javier Muozwill also be present.

Marches are being hosted in over 130 cities.

According to theWashington Post, there will be a rally but no actual march in Washington, D.C. However, organizersreportedly plan to take anaerial photograph of protesters on the Mall arranged in the form of the words Investigate Trump.

Last month, approximately 200 demonstrators men, women, and their children used their bodies to form the word RESIST! on the lawn of a public park located at President Trumps golf course in Rancho Palos Verdes, to protest his policies and urge him to release histax returns.

The group Indivisible San Pedro organized the event. Indivisible alsohas a hand in organizing Saturdays March for Truth rallies.

Resist! has become a sort of battle cry for progressives and Democrats.

The D.C. March for Truth is scheduled to begin at 11:00 a.m. near the Washington Monument and speakers will include Sarsour and Rep.Raskin.

In New York, the rally is slated to begin at9 a.m. at Foley Square. Protesters will then march along Broadway. Actress Rosie ODonnell and Rep. Nadler are expected to speak there. ODonnell has been one of Trumps most vocalopponents.

Adelle Nazarian is a politics and national security reporter for Breitbart News. Follow her on Facebookand Twitter.

Follow this link:
Progressives Plan National 'March for Truth,' Demand Independent ... - Breitbart News

Virginia progressives embrace federalism – Washington Post (blog)

Amid the whirlwind of hysteriaover President Trumpsdecision to withdraw from the Paris climate agreement came a genuine revelation: Democrats and progressives embracing an idea they once held in contempt: federalism.

And its all thanks to Donald Trump.

Gov. Terry McAuliffe (D), who signed an executive orderin mid-May directing the states Department of Environmental Quality to begin the process of establishing regulations in Virginia that will reduce carbon emissions from power plants, issued a statement Thursday in which he said he hoped his order would spur other states to join Virginia in showing Washington the way forward on this critical issue for our nation and our world.

Lieutenant Gov. Ralph Northam (D), a candidate for governor,echoedMcAuliffes line, saying he is committed to continuing that process McAuliffe set in motion and would be out there fighting the reckless actions of the Trump administration at every turn.

But for Northams challenger, this doesnt go far enough.

In a video posted to his Twitter feed, Democratic gubernatorial candidate Tom Perriello picked up the threads of McAuliffes statement, saying that at the state level, we will step up and do our part to lead on addressing climate change and making sure that our coastline here in Virginia and all of our clean air and clean water is protected.

But Perriello went much further, promisingthat if he becomes Virginias next governor, he wouldpush for Virginia to join an alliance of states of states committed to saving our planet.

The alliance in question, led by New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, California Gov. Jerry Brown and Washington Gov. Jay Inslee, all Democrats, says it is committed to achieving the U.S. goal of reducing emissions 26-28 percent from 2005 levels and meeting or exceeding the targets of the federal Clean Power Plan.

States banding together to thwart an unreasonable federal government action?

Thats not new; thats federalism.

And if it all sounds very familiar, it should: Ken Cuccinelli blazed the federalism trail during his time as Virginias attorney general.

In a 2011 speech to Hillsdale Colleges Kirby Center for Constitutional Studies and Citizenship, Cuccinelli discussed the number of lawsuits states had filed against the federal government over Environmental Protection Agency regulations, the Affordable Care Act and others and how it all represented pushback against a federal government that had overstepped its constitutional bounds.

Of his legal challenges to the federal government, Cuccinelli said: When I ran for attorney general of Virginia, I said that if the federal government crossed certain lines, I would challenge it.

Cuccinelli added that with the support of fellow Virginians and the American people, we have planted our flag and we are taking a stand. And if we are successful, future generations of Americans will have a chance to enjoy the liberty that has made America the envy of the world.

He made an explicit case for federalism in standing up to EPA regulations on greenhouse gas emissions. Perriello does not use the word but comes to similar conclusions for opposite ends.

In the topsy-turvy world of politics, Cuccinellis fight for individual liberty has become Perriellos fight for the planet.

The tea party meets the resistance and both find themselves marching under the banner of federalism.

Before Virginias elections are finished in November, we might even see a Democratic candidate talking about the rights of sovereign statesto challenge federal over reach.

And all because of Donald Trump.

Go here to read the rest:
Virginia progressives embrace federalism - Washington Post (blog)

Katrina vanden Heuvel column: Progressives have not yet begun to fight – Richmond.com

Elections produce winners and losers. There are no bonus points for participation. Democrats have been frustrated by losses in high-profile congressional races Rob Quist bested by Greg Gianforte in Montana and James Thompson falling short to Ron Estes in deep-red Kansas. In both elections, the Democratic nominees outperformed previous Democratic showings but came up short. In the nationally publicized special election in Georgia to fill the seat of Republican Tom Price, the Democratic candidate, Jon Ossoff, is still locked in a dead heat. This leads pundits and many Democrats to wonder: Is the resistance to President Donald Trump a dud at the polling booth?

Before the garment-rending and hand-wringing go too far, Democrats and pundits would do well to focus their eyes a little lower on the ballot. In special elections for state and local offices, progressive insurgents arent just coming close they are winning and sending a message to the establishment of both parties.

In the 9th state assembly district of Long Island, Christine Pellegrino a schoolteacher, union activist, Bernie Sanders delegate and Working Families Party Democrat dispatched her Republican opponent by a stunning 58 percent to 42 percent. As Newsday reported, this is usually a district where Democrats hardly compete. Trump swamped Hillary Clinton here by 23 percentage points. The veteran Republican state legislator who held the seat was re-elected by a 37-point margin over a Democratic challenger. But when he stepped down, Pellegrino a first-time candidate swept to victory.

In New Hampshire, Edith DesMarais pulled a similar upset in a state legislative race. Republicans should absolutely be concerned, William F.B. OReilly, a Republican partner in the November Team, a political consulting firm, told The New York Times. Two Republican canaries died in the coal mine yesterday.

Progressive candidates are rising in Democratic primaries in Democratic areas as well. In the primary for Philadelphia district attorney, civil rights attorney Larry Krasner, who has defended Occupy Philadelphia and Black Lives Matter protesters, won on a platform calling for an end to mass incarceration, police reform and more. Supported by Sanders and a range of progressive groups, his candidacy was also bolstered by the money of George Soros. This changes the game across the country, William Cobb of the American Civil Liberties Union told Philadelphia Magazine.

In the Democratic primary for mayor in Jackson, Miss., victory went to Chokwe Antar Lumumba, running on a bold program calling for a peoples administration that would feature police reform and a locally grounded, cooperative strategy for economic development. Lumumba marched in solidarity with black auto-plant workers at the March on Mississippi with Sanders and the UAW and helped to found the Mississippi Human Rights Collective that led efforts to remove the Confederate insignia from the states flag. His victory was one of many for progressives in Democratic primaries.

Clearly the populist energy generated by the Sanders campaign and the Trump resistance has electoral power. Democrats particularly the so-called Obama Coalition have been notorious no-shows in by-elections and special elections. Now they are turning out in larger numbers, while Republican turnout is at question. As Republican consultant OReilly put it: Special elections are a great measure of voter intensity. These are low-turnout affairs where the most motivated voters turn out. Trump voters and other Republicans simply didnt show up, and voters from the left did. In the high-visibility races with national attention, Republican and Democratic money floods in, turning the elections into high-stakes showdowns. Special elections outside that spotlight may well be a more accurate gauge of voter intensity.

Also notable in these victories is the growing infrastructure of progressive groups engaged in supporting transformative candidates. Our Revolution, an offshoot of the Sanders campaign, isnt alone in the field. Working Families Party, MoveOn.org and many other groups all raise money, volunteers and attention for progressive champions.

These candidates are not your standard Democrats. Like Sanders, they are campaigning for bold change. They pledge an end to corruption. They support aggressive public action for working people $15 minimum wage, investment in infrastructure, renewal of public education and making public college tuition free. This is now increasingly reflected at the national level as well, with Democratic legislators coming out for a $15 minimum wage, a major infrastructure jobs agenda and progressive tax reform.

To paraphrase Mark Twain, reports of the insurgencys death are premature. In reality, it has just begun to build. Activists continue to flood Republican town meetings. GOP health care and budget plans generate ever-greater opposition. Democrats victories at the state and local level may well augur what is yet to come.

Democrats start from a very deep hole, having lost more than 900 state legislative seats over the past eight years, leaving Republicans in complete control of 23 states. With Trump in the White House and the right dominating Republican majorities in both houses of Congress, capital-D and small-d democrats have every reason to despair. The Democratic Party apparatus still seems hidebound and timid. But the resistance is real. And the demand for fundamental change sparked by the Sanders insurgency is still building inside and outside the Democratic Party. Republicans are entrenched, backed by big money and a sophisticated right-wing infrastructure. But progressives are mobilized and just may be turning from protest to power.

Katrina vanden Heuvel, editor and publisher of the Nation magazine, writes a weekly online column for The Washington Post.

2017, The Washington Post

Continued here:
Katrina vanden Heuvel column: Progressives have not yet begun to fight - Richmond.com

Redlands progressives band together in response to November election – Redlands Daily Facts

REDLANDS >> Progressives here are speaking out.

Local residents inspired to stay politically active following the Nov. 8 election have formed Redlands for Progressive Change, an organization they say is focused on making positive, progressive change in the community and beyond.

I think whats really unique about Redlands for Progressive Change is that we came together after the election as this group of people really mourning the election and devastated about the outcome, but also really wanted to be proactive in moving forward and making progressive changes where we can, together, said Denise Davis, founder and facilitator.

The group, which meets monthly at the University of Redlands, was formed by local Hillary Clinton supporters following her loss to President Donald Trump in November.

At that time, Davis said, some group members made it clear they wanted to keep going, so they are.

The group has since reached more than 300 members on its Facebook page and has been involved in several local issues, most recently the citys district-based elections map drawing process.

Members also have written letters and made phone calls to state and national representatives on health care legislation, and participated in the Womens March and the March for Science.

Locally, the group plans voter-outreach initiatives to get residents registered to vote.

We are definitely advocating for womens rights, for the environment, for undocumented immigrants, for workers rights and for a living wage all of those things, said Kris Goodfellow, communications lead for the group. But on a local level there are some other practical things we want to do to foster community and a better Redlands.

While the group gives a voice to progressive causes, members also are working with conservatives in town in an effort to reach common ground on some issues.

The group is partnering with the Redlands Republican Womens Club, Federated, to host a forum in June on health care. The forum will highlight not only the perspectives on both sides of the aisle, but also where they align, Davis said.

I think its something that is not happening widely enough across the country right now, Davis said. If it goes well this could be a good model for community conversations that people could replicate in other communities.

After forming the group, Davis said she was wonderfully surprised at the diversity of its members, which include Clinton supporters, Bernie Sanders supporters and independent voters.

Advertisement

Our biggest meetings were around 50 to 55 people, Davis said. Thats pretty good for a community group that started in such a grass-roots way.

Redlands for Progressive Change will meet 4 to 5:30 p.m. June 11 at the University of Redlands, Larsen Hall, Room 127. For more information, email redlandsforprogressivechange@gmail.com.

Read the original post:
Redlands progressives band together in response to November election - Redlands Daily Facts