Noam Chomsky on the direction of the Democratic Party

[Padawanbater2]

"Suppose people like you, the Sanders movement, offered an authentic, constructive program for real hope and change, it would win these people back," he said.

"I think many of the Trump voters could have voted for Sanders if there had been the right kind of activism and organization. and those are possibilities. It's been done in the past under much harsher circumstances."

"You should also bear in mind what a remarkable phenomenon the Sanders campaign was. Here’s somebody unknown, came from nowhere, was using words like socialism which used to be a real curse word, no corporate or media support, no support from the wealthy, everything that has been crucial to win elections."

"He could have taken it over [the Democratic party] if it hadn’t been for shenanigans that you know about," he said, perhaps alluding to the Democratic National Committee’s alleged attempts to smear the Vermont senator.

He added that there have been many advances and achievements over the past 50 to 60 years, for women’s and civil rights, for gay people and in terms of people’s efforts to counter aggression.

"That means struggles today start from a much higher plane than they did many years ago," he said.

"Even the election itself suggests major opportunities. For one thing, the Democrats had a considerable majority in the vote," he said, referring to Ms Clinton’s lead of more than 2.6 million people in the popular count.

"And if you look at younger voters, the people who will shape the future, they were overwhelmingly anti-Trump and even more overwhelmingly pro-Sanders."

It will be up to young people, he said, to lead Americans towards a "decent and civilised world".


Independent

 

[schuylaar]

"He could have taken it over [the Democratic party]

He still might yet.

 

[schuylaar]

***** thread will read again; suggest to my friends..totally clutch

 

[ttystikk]

Amazing how the clowns let this thread sink without a trace; they can't handle truth.

 

[ttystikk]

Chomsky interview, with lots of links to further reading;

https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2018/03/noam-chomsky-populist-groundswell-u-s-elections-future-humanity.html

Excerpt;
LP: Which brings us to the narrative of Russian influence in the 2016 presidential election. I understand you’re not very impressed with this line.

NC: Well it’s very hard to take seriously for a number of reasons. One reason is the work of Thomas Ferguson and his colleagues [“How Money Won Trump the White House”]. There really is manipulation of elections, but it’s not coming from the Russians. It’s coming from the people who buy the elections. Take his study of the 2016 election [“Industrial Structure and Party Competition in an Age of Hunger Games: Donald Trump and the 2016 Presidential Election”]. That’s how you interfere with elections. Or the pretty spectacular study that he and his colleagues did about a year ago on Congress “How Money Drives US Congressional Elections,” where you just get a straight line [correlation between money and major party votes in Congress]. You rarely see results like that in the social sciences. That’s massive manipulation. Compared with that, what the Russians might be doing is minuscule. Quite aside from the fact that the U.S. does it all the time in other countries.

 

[ttystikk]

I just picked up The Chomsky Reader which still seems awfully timely, even though it was published in 1987.

 

[ttystikk]

Study; 'How money drives US elections'

https://www.ineteconomics.org/research/research-papers/how-money-drives-us-congressional-elections

 

[ttystikk]

A comment from the NC interview with Noam Chomsky linked above;

John k
'My critique is his view that even if elected pres, Bernie would have been powerless.
This would only be true if he could not get his appointments confirmed, which would be unprecedented. And certainly he could pick senators.
Once his team is in place he could jail bankers and break up monopolies, making himself enormously popular. And he would clearly make use of the bully pulpit. Threats to campaign against individuals would be effective.
And of course he would change out the DNC, moving the partly sharply progressive.
And withdraw from Syria etc.
And new chair at SEC.
the list goes on… think of the effect trumps horrible appointments are having…
Granted he couldn’t pass med for all in first term…
He said maybe win election… IMO the 40% that are indies (our largest party) would vote en masse.
There is a reason corps, their lackeys in MSM and pols hate and fear him.'

This puts the lie to the assertions of the powerlessness of an Independent Presidency. The bully pulpit, executive orders, the ability to really the public behind a campaign with real teeth against entrenched powers like the banks and their executives... The notion that he couldn't get anything done without an entire party backing him is simply ridiculous on its face.

 

[Unclebaldrick]

Amazing how the clowns let this thread sink without a trace; they can't handle truth.

 

[londonfog]

sad just fucking sad

A comment from the NC interview with Noam Chomsky linked above;

John k
'My critique is his view that even if elected pres, Bernie would have been powerless.
This would only be true if he could not get his appointments confirmed, which would be unprecedented. And certainly he could pick senators.
Once his team is in place he could jail bankers and break up monopolies, making himself enormously popular. And he would clearly make use of the bully pulpit. Threats to campaign against individuals would be effective.
And of course he would change out the DNC, moving the partly sharply progressive.
And withdraw from Syria etc.
And new chair at SEC.
the list goes on… think of the effect trumps horrible appointments are having…
Granted he couldn’t pass med for all in first term…
He said maybe win election… IMO the 40% that are indies (our largest party) would vote en masse.
There is a reason corps, their lackeys in MSM and pols hate and fear him.'

This puts the lie to the assertions of the powerlessness of an Independent Presidency. The bully pulpit, executive orders, the ability to really the public behind a campaign with real teeth against entrenched powers like the banks and their executives... The notion that he couldn't get anything done without an entire party backing him is simply ridiculous on its face.

Study; 'How money drives US elections'

https://www.ineteconomics.org/research/research-papers/how-money-drives-us-congressional-elections

I just picked up The Chomsky Reader which still seems awfully timely, even though it was published in 1987.

Chomsky interview, with lots of links to further reading;

https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2018/03/noam-chomsky-populist-groundswell-u-s-elections-future-humanity.html

Excerpt;
LP: Which brings us to the narrative of Russian influence in the 2016 presidential election. I understand you’re not very impressed with this line.

NC: Well it’s very hard to take seriously for a number of reasons. One reason is the work of Thomas Ferguson and his colleagues [“How Money Won Trump the White House”]. There really is manipulation of elections, but it’s not coming from the Russians. It’s coming from the people who buy the elections. Take his study of the 2016 election [“Industrial Structure and Party Competition in an Age of Hunger Games: Donald Trump and the 2016 Presidential Election”]. That’s how you interfere with elections. Or the pretty spectacular study that he and his colleagues did about a year ago on Congress “How Money Drives US Congressional Elections,” where you just get a straight line [correlation between money and major party votes in Congress]. You rarely see results like that in the social sciences. That’s massive manipulation. Compared with that, what the Russians might be doing is minuscule. Quite aside from the fact that the U.S. does it all the time in other countries.

Amazing how the clowns let this thread sink without a trace; they can't handle truth.

 

[captainmorgan]

We don't need a 80 year old running for pres, wake up.

 

[Unclebaldrick]

We don't need a 80 year old running for pres, wake up.

If you keep doing the same thing, expect the same result. That's why I am going to support a barrista for President. We have never elected a barrista; what could go wrong?

 

[travisw]

Amazing how the clowns let this thread sink without a trace; they can't handle truth.

So you three dip shits started a Chomsky thread in the middle of the night and wonder where everyone is. In the course of the interview he says Bernie couldn't have done a thing, had he been elected. You are personally so fucking dumb you include a quote from the comment section to bolster your assertion that

The notion that he couldn't get anything done without an entire party backing him is simply ridiculous on its face.

You said we can't handle the truth, but the fucking, as you say, ridiculous notion he couldn't get anything done belongs to Noam. It sure sounds like your little cult of personality is struggling with the truth because your proof thinks Bernie would have been as ineffectual as the rest of us,

 

[ttystikk]

So you three dip shits started a Chomsky thread in the middle of the night and wonder where everyone is. In the course of the interview he says Bernie couldn't have done a thing, had he been elected. You are personally so fucking dumb you include a quote from the comment section to bolster your assertion that


You said we can't handle the truth, but the fucking, as you say, ridiculous notion he couldn't get anything done belongs to Noam. It sure sounds like your little cult of personality is struggling with the truth because your proof thinks Bernie would have been as ineffectual as the rest of us,

Original post December 2016.

The author is effectively rebutted on this point in the comments, which I copied and posted.

The ballwashers are the acknowledged experts on cult of personality and group approval tactics.

We're providing solutions to America's problems while you're busy with character assassinations. It's just as if you know you don't have a plan, a platform or a way forward so you employ classic misdirection instead, hoping to fool and bully people into your establishment Democratic team.

Hint; the DCCC and the Democratic Party, itself an illegal organization that obstructs and subverts the People's Democracy, does not give one single solitary fuck about you or me unless we bring huge sums of money.

The only question left is whether you possess the ability to think for yourself or if you need the comfort of a group for approval and validation.

 

[ttystikk]

If you keep doing the same thing, expect the same result. That's why I am going to support a barrista for President. We have never elected a barrista; what could go wrong?

At least it's a change. Perhaps a barrista would be an effective champion for labor rights and better pay. They know how they're being exploited, after all.

Why do you disparage hard working people? Why do you ridicule service workers?

It just makes you look patrician, which you aren't and uncaring of your fellow citizens, which fits your pattern of late.

 

[Unclebaldrick]

Original post December 2016.

The author is effectively rebutted on this point in the comments, which I copied and posted.

The ballwashers are the acknowledged experts on cult of personality and group approval tactics.

We're providing solutions to America's problems while you're busy with character assassinations. It's just as if you know you don't have a plan, a platform or a way forward so you employ classic misdirection instead, hoping to fool and bully people into your establishment Democratic team.

Hint; the DCCC and the Democratic Party, itself an illegal organization that obstructs and subverts the People's Democracy, does not give one single solitary fuck about you or me unless we bring huge sums of money.

The only question left is whether you possess the ability to think for yourself or if you need the comfort of a group for approval and validation.

This is a pot forum, not a Pol Pot forum.

 

[Unclebaldrick]

At least it's a change. Perhaps a barrista would be an effective champion for labor rights and better pay. They know how they're being exploited, after all.

Why do you disparage hard working people? Why do you ridicule service workers?

It just makes you look patrician, which you aren't and uncaring of your fellow citizens, which fits your pattern of late.

Nice attempt at twisting logic comrade.

Seek help. When you finish yelling at traffic, I mean.

 

[ttystikk]

We don't need a 80 year old running for pres, wake up.

If this is honestly the biggest and most important criticism you can come up with against Bernie's candidacy then you're already a Progressive. Thanks for your support!

Name someone better and we'll be happy to consider them.

Until then, Bernie's name recognition is a far larger asset than his age is a detriment. The biggest obstacle Bernie faced during the nomination process was the press doing everything it could to ignore him and silence his message, even to extremes like pointedly not showing him addressing a jam packed stadium of tens of thousands and instead showing an empty podium where Trump was scheduled to speak... in awhile.

 

[ttystikk]

Nice attempt at twisting logic comrade.

Seek help. When you finish yelling at traffic, I mean.

I asked you a simple question and you respond with more character assassination.

The problem doesn't lie with me.

Why do you hate the idea that someone can disagree with you so much?

Is it because you know your cause isn't just? That your Party is unresponsive to you and most of your fellow citizens?

You aren't the voice of reason. In fact, with tactics like those you've increasingly displayed over the past months, you'd make a good brownshirt, just like Buckwit.

 

[ttystikk]

This is a pot forum, not a Pol Pot forum.

Again with the character assassination.

Not one reasoned argument or debating point in there anywhere, because you know you'd lose.