Help In These Times raise $5,000 in two weeks! Donate now!
Help this website survive! Donate to In These Times now!
All 10 comments by...

Gregory Wonderwheel

    • 25 Jun 08
    • 1:21 pm

    As a radical progressive I got a good laugh from Ken Brociner's essay. Ken, you haven't presented anything that progressives can learn from Obama. Obama says "we have to be careful not to slip into playing the game as it is customarily played," and then he goes to AIPAC and plays the game completely customarily and his flip-flop cave-in on Telecom Imunity is completely customary politics, just to name two examples. Ken, in case you didn't notice, Petraeus did betray the USA, and Sirota is right that Obama is keeping hush on important issues. Ken, Obama is the best choice among …

    Posted to What Progressives Can Learn from Obama
    • 25 Jun 08
    • 1:27 pm

    You can't have a critical mass for change if you don't have a mass of criticism about what needs to be changed.

    Posted to What Progressives Can Learn from Obama
    • 25 Jun 08
    • 2:04 pm

    Scorp, FYI, the fall of the Soviet Union had nothing to do with Marx or Socialism, neither of which were followed by the Soviet Union. If the Soviet Union had followed Marx and Socialism it would not have engaged in the cold war and it would have had a viable economy.. Your honors in history seem to have been ill gotten gains.

    Posted to McGovern, Obama, and 'transformative' change
    • 09 Jul 08
    • 12:57 am

    Eric L. writes, "but I think we can all agree the party’s full spectrum is left of center," I'm not sure what this means because the party''s full spectrum is both right and left of center. Of course part of this discussion is dependent on how one defines "the center" As the center is defined by the right, then of course the Democrats are primarily left of center. But as the center is defined by progressives there are a great many Democrats are right of center. As for my claim that the USSR could have been successful if it had followed …

    Posted to McGovern, Obama, and 'transformative' change
    • 09 Jul 08
    • 2:08 pm

    I wrote a long response that was over the 4000 word limit and the program lost it all when it returned to the previous page. I'm not goint to write it again. I will just say that we have an entirely different view of reality and all four samples that you use in support of your "left of center" hypothesis are actually just as much examples that show the "right of center" aspects of the Democratic Party. A socialist idea is one that has for its context and orientation the affirmation of collective responsibility for the planet and society. Socialism is …

    Posted to McGovern, Obama, and 'transformative' change
    • 27 Jul 08
    • 11:19 pm

    Eric L wrote: "I would have to guess your definition of liberty is rather oriented toward collectivity and the good of society, but esteeming the good of society (whatever that is) over the good of the individual may not be the way to establish either." YEs half right. My orientation to liberty is equally balanced between society and the individual. In the USA the idea of liberty is totally imbalanced toward the individual and thus is not real liberty to me. On the other hand a totalitarian approach of false collectivity or imposed collectivity would also be an imbalance in the …

    Posted to McGovern, Obama, and 'transformative' change
    • 25 Jun 08
    • 1:50 pm

    "Progressive" is one of those fun words that is inherently neutral of content but has an implied meaning that we can argue over. I mean progressive means being in favor of progress, right? But progress toward what? That is the real question. So to some people the industrial revolution was progress and progressive. We can progress toward the cliff and our doom, or we can progress toward a better day for all. Or we can progress toward a two teired socitey of the rich and the poor as we seem to be doing now. I fight for the word progressive to …

    Posted to Liberals, Progressives and the Left
    • 25 Jun 08
    • 1:52 pm

    The Progressives’ Creed: What is a progressive? A progressive is a person who believes that the progress of humanity is to be measured by the betterment of the human condition for the largest proportion of people as possible and that politics should in all cases be used to better the human condition for all and to distribute the benefits of society equally so that individuals receive equal opportunities for education, work, and fulfillment and no class, group, or people are enriched at the detriment or exploitation of another. 1. Religion and the Secular State: As there are many paths up a …

    Posted to Liberals, Progressives and the Left
    • 25 Jun 08
    • 1:52 pm

    Progressive's Creed ~ continued.. 5. Nationalism and Internationalism: Nationalism and internationalism both have their place, but the harmful extremes of nationalism and internationalism are to be avoided. Nations and states are essential in the organization of common interests in geographical areas. Beneficial nationalism is the recognition of the people of a nation to be sovereign in the democratic control of their nation. However harmful nationalism is a perversion of national pride that asserts the superiority of one’s own nation over another to the detriment of international cooperation. Beneficial internationalism recognizes that international human interaction is necessary for the benefit of the …

    Posted to Liberals, Progressives and the Left
    • 09 Dec 07
    • 5:12 pm

    When I read an article like that that totally ignores Dennis Kucinich, placing him parentheses, I have no confidence that the Democrats will ever find a path to meaningfulness. What use is victory if even the self-described progressive pundits like Moberg don't get it that Kucinich is the candidate who embodies the very things they are talking about, yet they ignore his candidacy?

    Posted to The Democrats' Path to Victory
Help this website survive! Donate to In These Times now!