LBJ Revivalist
ModerateDemocrat1990
Jr. Member
Posts: 799
Political Matrix
E: -5.87, S: -2.87
|
 |
« on: December 06, 2010, 10:27:26 AM » |
|
I know many here have stated I'm a "concern troll" because of my posts with regard to the Democratic Party, and to Liberalism/Progressivism. I'd like to explain myself. The thing was, I had been spending time at some really radical right wing forums, as well as watching Glenn Beck--I was trying to open myself up to other views. The rabid nature of both towards Liberalism, Obama and the Democratic Party made me feel almost like a criminal of sorts for being a Liberal--Remember, in such venues, Liberals are presented as literally being evil.
Not only that, but I did see some undue radicalism on the part of Obama and his team--For example, Van Jones with his Socialist background and his statements about redistributing wealth to Native Americans. While I'm not opposed to a person with a Socialist or Communist background holding high office--If people want to elect someone like that, that's their business--I don't think having such a controversial figure in a President's circle does Liberalism or the Democratic Party any good. Also, I don't believe in reparations or in anything which could give rise to a further division of the races and ethnicities in this country--We should be past that on both sides.
The Fox News smear campaign on the President, and on Democrats and Liberals in general is very fierce, and it kind of effected me, and you'll know why in a bit.
I'm a Liberal, and I don't see myself as a Socialist, even though many right wingers will try to equate the two. I've down reading on Socialism, and Communism enough to know that they aren't the cartoons that the right purport them to be--For example, I've seen many on the right purport Communism to be a state wherein the State is huge and owns everything; But in truth, of course, Communism is stateless and classless. And once again, I don't believe Liberalism is either Socialism or Communism.
I'm only 20, and so I've not had the long experience of partisan, bitter politics that many here might have; I only started getting interested in politics around the 2008 campaign, and what was a passing interest became an intense passion in 2009--So I am very new to the game, and thus even though my dyed-in-the-wool nature is pretty Liberal on economic issues, I wasn't immune to the right wing's propaganda.
I know at times that my posts do come off hyperbolic, but that was due to that displaced feeling of anger--An anger borne out of the hate being directed towards Liberals (for example, hearing Liberalism is the ''cancer on America."), and also a frustration with the seeming radical right wing turn that the country has taken in the past year. It was also borne out of the right's "Us vs. Them" mentality--with Palin, for example, talking about "The Real America", and I was angry at the President for seemingly only adding fuel to these people's fire.
I kind of worry about a wave of anti-Intellectualism washing over this country, and of Palin types dominating the political landscape--I believe intellectualism does have a place in politics, and that intelligent men and women should inhabit high office, not divisive, folksy figures; I also feel a return to Laissez-Faire economics, which I find to be rather insane and morally abhorrent. So, I apologize for my threads and posts which came off hyperbolic.
Now, to get to the title of the topic, I'd like if we could have a sort of "Complacent Liberalism." What I mean is, an economic Liberalism which doesn't go beyond a certain point, or which takes the old ideas of the Roosevelts and LBJ and renews or reassembles them to fit the current times. I'm sort of complacent in my own views, and I greatly admire the said statesmen and their economic ideas. I'd like if we just kept to those sort of ideas--I love the idea of a grand platform--TR with his Fair Deal, FDR with the New Deal, Johnson with the Great Society. These were grand, all encompassing ideas; a package of legislation with a clear purpose and branding, if you will. I'd like a New Liberalism, a political environment of reform where we can have a sensible form of Universal Healthcare, a sensible form of Housing; More Government work programs (perhaps a new form of WPA); Environmental legislation; Legislation which promotes full equality for the LGBT community. More regulation, but not stifling--If we could go back to pre-1975 levels of regulation, that might work. Retool these sort of laws so that they are effective and have teeth without creating an overwhelming or complex bureaucracy. I'd also like if we saddled off the "flux" of the Great Society--Gradually getting rid of stuff like the NEA, NEH, NPR, etc, so that more money can be spent on helping people's lives, rather than art projects. Also, a softer stance on welfare--Maybe an emphasis on workfare and earned help. I do believe that social insurance and "social justice" should remain a cornerstone of Liberalism.
We also need to seriously get down to business with regard to saving and preserving Social Security and Medicare so that it's around when my generation reaches old age--Not in a privatized or stock form, but in the same form it is now, with a renewed trust fund. I'd also like if Liberals and the Democratic Party weren't so beholden to labor interests. I believe in labor, and worker's rights, and worker's comp, but I also believe labor reform is greatly needed in many areas--sensible reforms.
We should also try to limit the lobbyists, and abhor any truly radical or fringe elements. I don't want Communists in the Party or in any position around the Party--Let them join their own parties and stop polluting the Democratic Party--No more fuel for the right wingers.
I'd also like if the Democratic Party became more hawkish, especially on the matter of border control. We were once the part of men like FDR and Harry Truman--Presidents whom valued this nation's security and weren't overly sensitive to the cries of political correctness in achieving safety, and I believe we should go back to that--I'm a Democrat who for example supports Arizona's law. I'm a Democrat who also supports "Law and Order"--More police, greater and reinforced intelligence gathering resources and greater cooperation between the FBI and state and local law enforcement; I'm a Democrat who also supports the Patriot Act.
We should also never again seriously touch the subject of gun control--Let's become a very Second Amendment friendly party. On the flipside, I believe we should become a little more liberal with regard to social issues--I favor, personally, the legalization of Marijuana BUT it has to be regulated well as we do other legal drugs; I also favor legalizing prostitution, though this action would probably have to come from the state level and if it ever happened (not likely) it'd be a very gradual thing.
We should also try to untie Science from our politics. Al Gore made himself the symbolic figurehead of Global Warming by making that his pet issue, and inadvertantly turned a perhaps legitimate environmental concern into a divisive partisan political issue, with Gore as the target--Attempts to deligitimize even the concept of Global Warming were made not only to protect business interests, but to "get Gore" and the left wing in general. I've seen it on the right wing boards--Many of them don't even believe in any sort of Climate Change, man made or otherwise. We should try to divorce ourselves politically from Science, because otherwise one of the most valuable tools for mankind's growth and acquisition of knowledge becomes the fodder of political football, and that's dangerous to Science itself.
I'd like a tougher Democratic Party--One that doesn't buckle so easily to the right wing; One that isn't so "wimpy." FDR and Truman enjoyed a good fight with their opponents; Since McGovern we've been seen as the "weaker" party. Look at the way Clinton, and perhaps Obama have buckled to the opposition--You don't see Republicans giving up that easily, or buckling to popular demand.
I made a thread earlier about whether the Democratic Party should go more centrist--and in some ways, I do think some of my ideas would make it more centrist. That thread, however, reflects my realist opinions on political realities as they are at present, and as such it's subject to change; A centrist move is just a temporary pragmatic idea to fight the current tide of the right. My ultimate goals for the Democratic Party, however, lie in this thread, as well as the explanation for my hyperbolic threads made prior to today.
So with this written, I hope you can better understand, and please give me feedback on some of my ideas--I'd like to hear opinions.
|
