Cindy Sheehan

[Revy]

I think that Cindy Sheehan is a very admirable person for her work against the war and her rejection of the Democratic Party's corporate and imperialist policies.

After the November elections she plans to start a party called The First Party (mocking the term "third party"). This seems to be to the left of the Green Party, but not socialist. She does support nationalizing industries and she has met with Hugo Chavez and said she'd rather live in Venezuela than in Bush's regime.

But she's not a socialist and socialists should keep that in mind. In an interview with the Socialist Party (UK) she said that she thinks capitalist systems with progressive policies work fine. She also wrote in a blog that she thought right-wingers were hypocritical because they call her policies socialism but she thinks the bailout is "socialism for the rich", which isn't a very enlightened opinion from our perspective, because we know there's nothing socialist about it.

So I'm just saying, don't get swept up in The First Party. I suppose with enough socialists, it could turn out to be good for us, but you never know. I'd love if Cindy Sheehan made the transition toward socialism. That would be amazing for the cause. But we should wait until that happens.

[GPDP]

Hey, it could happen. Right now, she stands as a social democrat of sorts, which is definitely quite radical compared to the Dems and even the Greens.

If MLK eventually came around to socialism, I'm sure Sheehan can as well.

[Die Neue Zeit]

Note to American IMTers: a golden opportunity awaits for you to "enter" the First Party!

[KurtFF8]

Isn't Sheehan running against Pelosi for congress? I wonder how that's going.

The problem that I have with Sheehan is that she doesn't do a good job at articulating herself and expressing her message. I don't think that if she started to adhere to socialism that this would change of course, but it would be nice to have another national icon be a socialist.

But either way, she speaks quite loudly against American policy and we shouldn't ignore that because she doesn't adhere to our ideas/

[Revy]

Isn't Sheehan running against Pelosi for congress? I wonder how that's going.

The problem that I have with Sheehan is that she doesn't do a good job at articulating herself and expressing her message. I don't think that if she started to adhere to socialism that this would change of course, but it would be nice to have another national icon be a socialist.

But either way, she speaks quite loudly against American policy and we shouldn't ignore that because she doesn't adhere to our ideas/

I agree , but I'm just saying. There's a tendency in the "socialist" left to support capitalist candidates, like the Greens, Nader (or even the Dems :cursing:) that really shouldn't be supported. It's like they don't even take the time to look at socialist options.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

That's because they have abandoned class politics.

[S&Y]

Sheehan is running on a platform of Single-payer health care, media reform, overturning all free trade agreements, repealing the Patriot Act, renewable energy, nationalizing oil and electricity, ending the War on Drugs, legalizing Cannabis (drug), ensuring all talks in the Middle East are fair to all parties, ending torture, closing Guantanamo Bay detention camp, Overseas commitment to cleaning up Superfund sites, ending deregulation, ending No Child Left Behind, legalizing gay marriage.

[Die Neue Zeit]

^^^ Not much room for class politics in that platform, though :(

[GPDP]

Indeed, but to her credit, she is faaaar more representative of the wishes of much of the American populace than most politicians so far, perhaps even more so than the likes of Dennis Kucinich.

[Die Neue Zeit]

Kucinich gives me the creeps, actually. His smiles remind me too much of crook-politicians' smirks.

[GPDP]

And yet...
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_pdJDY9PvxRM/Rwt9faFGxpI/AAAAAAAAAac/9RchVUuFJNo/s1600/dennis-kucinich-and-elizabeth-harper.jpg

[Die Neue Zeit]

^^^ Just an aside. ;)

[cmbnd10]

I don't like her at all. She is a walking side show. She has exploited her son's death and has been perceived by much of the population as a nut.

I don't like any of that being associated with the left.

[Sendo]

the greens? capitalist? No green platform could actually work under capitalism, and though I don't know much about the Greens USa, they seem pretty radical given their Pres ticket this year. Though she was once in the Dems and tried to fight from within Congress, since getting kicked out shes gone really far left.

Hearing McKinney and Clemente speak, they sound more left than Nader. Nader, by the way, was not a Green Party guy; he just kept getting their endorsement without trying. He's admitted a break with them recently over some vague reasons, who knows.

[Revy]

the greens? capitalist? No green platform could actually work under capitalism, and though I don't know much about the Greens USa, they seem pretty radical given their Pres ticket this year. Though she was once in the Dems and tried to fight from within Congress, since getting kicked out shes gone really far left.

Hearing McKinney and Clemente speak, they sound more left than Nader. Nader, by the way, was not a Green Party guy; he just kept getting their endorsement without trying. He's admitted a break with them recently over some vague reasons, who knows.
They are left but not socialist. They want kinder, gentler capitalism.

[Red October]

Indeed, but to her credit, she is faaaar more representative of the wishes of much of the American populace than most politicians so far, perhaps even more so than the likes of Dennis Kucinich.

What are you talking about? Most people in America do not support that kind of left-liberalism. If that was true then people like Kucinich might get more than 1-2% in Democratic primary elections. Let's face it, at this point in history, Americans do not really want socialism.

[Incendiarism]

But they do want something, which is why it's necessary to point them in the direction of socialism, tearing and ripping away the shameful misconceptions engendered in them by church, state, and media.

[Kukulofori]

I don't like her at all. She is a walking side show. She has exploited her son's death and has been perceived by much of the population as a nut.

I don't like any of that being associated with the left.

Dude, that's what they WANT you to think. She's a side show because the media has painted her as a side show, and guess who owns the media.

[Kassad]

Political extremism, in the sense of American politics, is not popular right now. That's why Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich are not the front-runners for their party. Still, the media, owned by America's biggest corporations, is afraid of these kinds of candidates. I hope that after four more years of this bile, people might realize who the legitimate candidates are.

[BraneMatter]

The Democrats won back the majority in 2006 based on Americans' opposition to the war, and desire to end it immediately.

And what did Pelosi and Reid do?

Absolutely NOTHING!

Far as I'm concerned, I hope Cindy throws Nancy out of her plush Speaker's office on her lying arse. I doubt it will happen, though.



That's because they have abandoned class politics.


I disagree. They are just caught in a Catch-22 like the rest of us. Vote for Obama to avoid a McCain victory, or vote third party (most socialist candidates are not even on the ballot in every state) and maybe help McCain win anyway.


Given that the U.S. is nowhere close to opting for socialism, do you settle for the best deal you can get, or throw a temper tantrum protest vote? :confused: Either way, you loose.

Even if you view Obama as no better, which I think many of us do, your third party vote does nothing to change anything. Might as well stay home, because we know either McCain or Obama will be the next president. :crying:

So is there REALLY any good choice at present? Maybe it's just a crapshoot.

What we ALL need to do is one hell of a job marketing our ideas to the people to offset all the years of anti-socialist, anti-communist propaganda. Once a socialist third party crosses that 15% threshold, and is then invited to the debates and given some media attention, then you have accomplished something meaningful.

How to get there, that's what we need to focus on, and not jumping on each other for how they deal with the current electoral conundrum. I'm just not ready to start tossing people out of the revolutionary ranks over this, given the available options.

Let's face it, it's going to take a long time to move the U.S. to accept socialism. We must take a long-term view, because that's the circumstances history has dealt us. After all, Marx never did say "by such and such a date, this or that," he just outlined a dialectical and historical process working itself out.

Note: One way to solve the election question might be this: If McCain is going to win your state anyway, and there is a third party on the ballot (PSL, Green, Nader, etc.) that you like, then go ahead and cast the protest vote. If Obama is way ahead in your state, go ahead with a third party vote if available. If it's a toss-up in your state, then either go with Obama to stop McCain, or just stay home or vote third, either way it's a crapshoot.

[DancingLarry]

I don't like her at all. She is a walking side show. She has exploited her son's death and has been perceived by much of the population as a nut.

I don't like any of that being associated with the left.

Anyone who actually gains prominence in vocal opposition to the policies of the USA's bourgeois power elite will be characterized in the hegemonic media as a nutcase. The tactic of diminishing dissent as a problem of mental health or character defects is hardly new, for instance the repressive apparatus of the Soviet Union in the post-Stalin era made this their primary tactic for marginalizing and silencing dissidents. Anyone who expects that a prominent dissident will be treated with seriousness and respect by the bourgeois media is the one with the psychological problem.

[MarxSchmarx]

The problem that I have with Sheehan is that she doesn't do a good job at articulating herself and expressing her message. I don't think that if she started to adhere to socialism that this would change of course, but it would be nice to have another national icon be a socialist...

http://www.revleft.com/vb/../revleft/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.revleft.com/vb/../showthread.php?p=1260712#post1260712) I don't like her at all. She is a walking side show. She has exploited her son's death and has been perceived by much of the population as a nut.

I don't like any of that being associated with the left.


Give us a call when YOU inspire a protest rally that gets covered by the American national media.

I agree, though, that her authenticity can easily come across as impulsive, and this puts her in a real bind.

[KurtFF8]

Give us a call when YOU inspire a protest rally that gets covered by the American national media.

I agree, though, that her authenticity can easily come across as impulsive, and this puts her in a real bind.

Just because I haven't or may not be able to do such a thing (which of course I've never really been in a situation to) doesn't mean I can't critique others.

[MarxSchmarx]

Just because I haven't or may not be able to do such a thing (which of course I've never really been in a situation to) doesn't mean I can't critique others.

Of course not. But if you're critique is that:


she doesn't do a good job at articulating herself and expressing her message.

Yet she managed to grab national headlines and numerous TV cameras and an entire nation. She got them to understand where her opposition to the war is coming from. Helped by Katrina, she did a fine job to make the case that Bush is basically callous and indifferent. Well, I'd call that a pretty decent job of getting your message out even if she has made some missteps since.

[PRC-UTE]

But they do want something, which is why it's necessary to point them in the direction of socialism, tearing and ripping away the shameful misconceptions engendered in them by church, state, and media.

good post.

I think that the more people who are getting radicalised, even if they're confused and drawing some questionable political conclusions is still a breath of fresh air.

[KurtFF8]

Of course not. But if you're critique is that:


Yet she managed to grab national headlines and numerous TV cameras and an entire nation. She got them to understand where her opposition to the war is coming from. Helped by Katrina, she did a fine job to make the case that Bush is basically callous and indifferent. Well, I'd call that a pretty decent job of getting your message out even if she has made some missteps since.

Right but since her role seems to solely be a "talking head" of the movement, critiques of how she goes about it should be importantly looked at by her I would imagine.