Comments on: Jared Bernstein: Missing in Action

By: Peter Frase

Peter Frase — Sat, 10 Oct 2009 16:17:16 +0000

Chris makes a good case for Obama-as-conservative. But I’d add that I don’t really see the point of pretending that terms like “liberal” and “conservative” have some precisely defined meaning. Sure, I could have called Obama “center-left”, with some plausibility, given the current state of American politics. On the other hand, by the standards of Western Europe or even the United States of a few decades ago, he’d definitely be considered a conservative. To me, it’s a rhetorical choice–defining Obama as “center-left” implies that the center-point of legitimate opinion is somewhere to his right. What we want to do, obviously, is push the debate in such a way that the center gets redefined leftward.

By: Chris Maisano

Chris Maisano — Sat, 10 Oct 2009 14:06:57 +0000

I don’t think it’s unfair to characterize the Obama admin as fundamentally conservative at all. There’s evidence for this in both its policy approach and underlying ideology. Basically, Obama is a Burkean. He’s not against change, indeed he calls for it when he deems it appropriate, but wants it to happen slowly and in a conciliatory fashion. There’s tinkering with certain aspects of the system, but ultimately with the goal of conserving it. So yeah, in a fundamental sense I think Peter’s right.

By: Ben

Ben — Sat, 10 Oct 2009 12:47:26 +0000

“In that case, it amounts to nothing more than a co-opting of progressive voices by a fundamentally conservative political project.”

This is a great piece, Peter, but I take issue with that statement. It would be more accurate to call it a centrist or center-left project, not a conservative one. Saying otherwise is intellectually dishonest.

And I have been thinking the same thing about Hilda Solis. I have always wanted to believe that, deep down, Obama still has the heart of a community organizer and is more to the left than he has shown at the beginning of his administration. But his cabinet picks, along with his agenda, have shown him to be far too conciliatory. I mean, Ron Kirk as trade rep? There are probably more conservatives and moderates that were offered cabinet posts than bonafide progressives.

By: Ben

Ben — Sat, 10 Oct 2009 12:43:06 +0000

Who in the world is the Jason Furman mentioned as being in the meeting when Bernstein was not?

By: Chris Maisano

Chris Maisano — Thu, 08 Oct 2009 13:30:28 +0000

A lot of stuff the WFP has done has been really great, and I am very glad that it exists here and can exercise some real influence in NY politics. But I agree with Bhaskar that leftists should probably be focusing mostly on movement building (and intellectual/ideological work!) outside of parties, Democratic or otherwise, so that the work of all those groups out there adds up to more than the sum of its parts.

By: Bhaskar Sunkara

Bhaskar Sunkara — Thu, 08 Oct 2009 06:57:36 +0000

One more thing….

I’ll disagree with Chris when he saids there “is no real U.S. left”. I know what he means, but we have plenty of organizations making an impact. The CiW, JWJ, local union organizers, activists of all stripes, progressive journalists and intellectuals, etc. We just have no real *organized* left. It is a lot easier to imagine a reconfigured and expanded left than one rising from nothingness into being.

By: Bhaskar Sunkara

Bhaskar Sunkara — Thu, 08 Oct 2009 06:43:28 +0000

The WFP has tried to expand (maybe successfully) to a few other states and they’ve done quite a bit of good in New York working to repel the Rockefeller Drug Laws and espousing a pretty solid social democratic platform .

I still think that the primary goal of the left should be attempting to see whether its possible to form a pole of opposition outside the Democratic Party (institutionally, obviously key politicized actors are in the Democratic tent). I’m not proposing the politics of microsects of course or 3rd party electoral ventures. If the alternative is microsects or the “inside-outside” approach I’ll take the latter in a heart beat.

I liked Chris’ piece from last month “Prison of the Possible” http://theactivist.org/blog/the-prison-of-the-possible

By: Chris Maisano

Chris Maisano — Thu, 08 Oct 2009 05:17:01 +0000

Yeah, the but the WFP can exist here in NY mostly because fusion voting is legal in our state. That’s not true in most other states. They’re kind of an exception that proves the rule as far as I can tell.

By: Lucas

Lucas — Thu, 08 Oct 2009 00:05:57 +0000

That’s too sweeping of a pronouncement, Chris. On the national scene, maybe. But there are plenty of state and local examples that prove otherwise. The Working Families Party in New York, while far from perfect, is a remarkably effective inside/outside example of electoral organizing and pushing a pro-worker reform agenda.

By: Chris Maisano

Chris Maisano — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 21:20:38 +0000

Good piece, Peter. I didn’t think Bernstein’s appointment was ever going to be much more than a bit of bone throwing to liberals, and that certainly seems to be the case. You’re entirely right to say that this kind of case “amounts to nothing more than a co-opting of progressive voices by a fundamentally conservative political project,” but I think that this analysis can be taken even further. Since there’s no real U.S. left to speak to pressure the Dems, the inside/outside strategy is probably something that we need to just give up on.