"It is Time for Ruthless Aggression"

CFordUNC

CFordUNC

Legend of ZZL
ZZL Supporter
Messages
8,492
I enjoyed a good read in the Bulwark this morning from an author whose work I typically enjoy, but who I think wrote a piece yesterday deserving of its own discussion (that, and I had no idea which thread to put it on. Feel totally free to merge with another one, mods).

Jonathan Last is, like myself and several members of this community, a former Republican and still maintains *some* conservative bonafides. But similar to many of us, he is completely disenfranchised with the illiberal mania which has fully engulfed and completely consumed our former political party. His piece linked below makes the case for "ruthless aggression" from the Democrats, with the major victory in the redistricting fight being the blueprint to further success. In this piece he argues for the expansion of the Supreme Court, a notion at which I admittedly would have balked and summarily dismissed as a non-starter for about the 99.99% of my political life prior to now. Since there are so many brilliant folks in this community from whom I enjoy learning- especially so many folks with deep knowledge of the law and legal system- I'd love to get thoughts on this piece.

Personally, I've had my mind changed. I think that the Democratic Party (and inclusive of any pro-democracy independents and conservatives) should absolutely continue to fight fire with fire, and perhaps even with a blowtorch. I philosophically disagree with gerrymandering but fully support what Virginia and California did in response to Texas, and I think that the only plausible way to one day have federal legislation enacted that bans partisan gerrymandering is to aggressively and ruthlessly bring to heel the singular political party that steadfastly refuses to allow such legislation to pass. The current Republican Party doesn't respect rules and norms, and they don't respect the fecklessness or feigned powerlessness that has been the calling card of the Democratic Party over the last decade of Trumpism. I am heartened that it seems that Democrats are finally ready to do whatever it takes to give the GOP a taste of its own medicine, in hopes that at some point they will have no choice but to seek bi-partisan compromise or risk continued beatings. As I like to say, it ain't no fun when the rabbit's got the gun, and right now after the win in the redistricting fight coupled with the abysmal political climate for Republicans, the Democratic Party has a unique and extremely rare opportunity to wield a proverbial bazooka.

Would love to get others' thoughts on this piece.



www.thebulwark.com

It Is Time for Ruthless Aggression

The national battle over gerrymandering should be just the first step. Next up: expanding SCOTUS.
www.thebulwark.com www.thebulwark.com
 
The real upside is this might finally force a reality check on the whole “states’ rights” idea. In practice, it’s not really a consistent principle—it gets used when it’s convenient and dropped when it’s not. And that’s a tough position to keep defending. You can’t really claim to believe in state authority only when it gives you the outcome you want.
 
pspsps said:
I look to Ro Khanna on the Democrats side. He is openly aggressive about the oligarchy and kleptocracy despite representing a very wealthy district.
Click to expand...
Even a wealthy district is going to be majority working stiffs. Although they make more than the average working stiff, they are still drawing a paycheck and have real issues with that oligarchy. Democrats can appeal to those folks with more favorable labor laws like banning non-competes and cracking down on H1B. Don't discount them.

But the people that give campaign contributions/bribes are going to be that oligarchy and kleptocracy. Democrats can only appeal to those people by paying lip service to labor but helping the man while on office.
 
pspsps said:
I look to Ro Khanna on the Democrats side. He is openly aggressive about the oligarchy and kleptocracy despite representing a very wealthy district.
Click to expand...
And his father-in-law is a major contributor to Republicans in Ohio and elsewhere. Must make for some interesting Thanksgiving discussions.
(Do Indians celebrate Thanksgiving?)
 
When I was 7, I attended a k-12 school and was pretty soft hearted and easily intimidated. I was being picked on by older kids and cried to my mom about it. Quietly, my dad started teaching me how to throw a punch. Every day before mom got home, he worked with me on body blows and even uppercuts.

When he thought I was ready, he told me "next time they bother you. Find the biggest one in the group, kick him as hard as you can in the balls and as he doubles over, knock his fucking chin off of his face. I'll deal with your mother"

I have never forgotten that lesson and it has always served me well. Republicans turned into bullies. Treat them that way. Kick em in the balls and knock their fucking chins off their faces. They will learn.
 
sringwal said:
The real upside is this might finally force a reality check on the whole “states’ rights” idea. In practice, it’s not really a consistent principle—it gets used when it’s convenient and dropped when it’s not. And that’s a tough position to keep defending. You can’t really claim to believe in state authority only when it gives you the outcome you want.
Click to expand...
I agree. How big on "states' rights" can Republicans be when St. Donald of Mar-a-Lago wants to federalize elections?
 
Ftr, I posted here about a year ago that the Dems should start fighting fire with fire. I was rebuked for it, with a lot of people on here saying Dems should never stoop down to the Pubs' level. I'm glad to see that some of you are finally starting to come around.
 
S

Politics Thread 'Poli Sci, Econ and Game Theory Are VERY clear'

Very clear about what needs to be done. This is going to be another public service brought to you by superrific productions. It's going to be long and I will split it over multiple posts, because there is some background needed to grasp all the material. Let's start with democracy and game theory.

1. Game theory is what John Nash invented, was the theory refined and popularized by John Nash, as dramatized in A Beautiful Mind. It's not a special theory. It's simply a mathematical formulation of multi-actor competition. A "game" is simply a series of events in which the...
  • Like
 
sunnyheel said:
It’s well past time that Democrats took seriously their campaign appeals to democratic values. Talk is cheap. Put the gloves on!
Click to expand...
FWIW I think it is much more difficult to impose/enforce democratic values through "ruthless aggression" than a lot of people seem to think. The great tragedy of the transgression of democratic norms that we've seen over the last few years is that it is much easier to destroy those norms than it is to rebuild them. Trump has transgressed norms to purge the government of many good, or at least capable, people, and replaced them with political stooges and dysfunction. Can democrats trangress those same norms to purge the stooges and put everything back again when they get back into power? Then once THAT purge is over declare, through new law or otherwise, that henceforth purging government employees for ideological reasons is banned? They can certainly try, but once you've set a precedent that it's OK for someone acting with "pure" motives to do a little bad in the service of the greater good, it becomes much easier for "impure" actors to clothe themselves in the same rhetoric, and in today's diffuse and misinformation-filled media ecosystem, it will be hard for most people to tell the difference.

It is also the case that Dems have rarely had, any time recently, the political power to do anything to seriously buttress Democratic norms. They has a razor thin Senate majority under Biden, one that was largely illusory as the likes of Sinema and Manchin were Dems in name only and obstructed everyone else's ability to do anything meaningful. 47-48 Dems had a pretty good idea of what needed to be done, IMO, and it didn't matter because they needed 50+.

To be clear here I think there are a lot of things Dems can do more "aggressively" within the context of Democratic norms to help reinforce those norms, at least once they regain the power to do so. As I've said repeatedly, top of the list for me is filibuster reform. All legislation needs to be able to be passed by majority vote in the Senate. The current version of the filibuster is not the only reason for the continued executive power creep and congressional dysfunction we've seen, but it is the biggest (and easiest to fix) reason. Bolstering anti-corruption law to the point that the Supreme Court can't neuter it out of existence, like in the current scenario, is also absolutely critical. I also think DC and PR statehood are things Dems can and should pursue. I can get on board with Supreme Court expansion, too, but personally I still worry that's a temporary/counterproductive fix because it will likely ensure fairly frequent court expansion over the net few decades whenever political control flips.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top