Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

BillZBubb

(10,650 posts)
3. It started out as a basic survival mechanism. That is understandable.
Sat Apr 9, 2016, 02:03 PM
Apr 2016

The republicans could raise almost unlimited cash. The Democrats, representing the common man, could never hope to compete.

Part of the justification for the DLC was just that. The decision was made to push the party rightward on corporate and economic policy while remaining committed to social justice. That would open up the corporate coffers to Democratic candidates.

The problem was and always will be how do you take great sums of money from persons or corporations and not have that influence your decisions? Human nature being what it is, you cannot.

And once that corrupting influence has begun it is a slippery slope into subservience. The money, and the power that brings, is addictive.

A big problem we as party members have is that it is so easy for someone corrupted by the flow of money to justify supporting the corporate agenda, not Democratic goals. Our system has quirky ways of getting legislation passed which allows for plenty of obfuscation. It is very easy to hide what you are doing on most bills. You can claim to be against something yet vote to support it. You can claim to be for something and yet vote to kill it.

This is one of the most important issues facing our party. We need to decide what Democrats really stand for. I'm not sure I know anymore.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Occupy Underground»When Can Democrats Have "...»Reply #3