Maybe this is a bad idea, but I’m going to take another stab at expressing what I tried to yesterday, and clearly failed.
First, I definitely offended some folks with my crappy writing yesterday. That wasn’t my intention and I know I messed up. I genuinely apologize.
My intention was to suggest how to communicate in a way that will get results and effect change. That might be rich given the above. I recognize the irony.
Venting can be therapeutic and has a place in discourse. I think Elsewhere should be a place where we can do that. Writing “Democrats Suck!!!” or variations thereof can be healthy venting. I don’t think it accomplishes anything else, though.
If the intent of communication is to effect change, I would suggest a different format of communication. This comes from several sources like the Resistance Lab and feedback directly from my representatives, not just me. Writing here, even though it doesn’t seem like it is an attempt to effect change, is communicating with others who will form opinions based on what we write and may act or not act based on those opinions. Essentially, we’re attempting to influence others to coordinate efforts, whether we want to or not.
When we’re reacting to a specific action or event, we should be specific. Who did it? What did they do, and why is it wrong? What do we want others to do about it?
So, for example, if I’m writing to my congressperson, I’m going to say “Chuck Schumer is failing to bring Senate Democrats together to vote as a block to disrupt the T**** Administration’s disastrous tariffs. While it might score political points for T**** to crash the economy, it’s the most vulnerable Americans who are hurt by this. If he can’t organize Senate Democrats, he needs to be replaced as Senate Minority Leader by someone who can organize an actual resistance. I ask you, [Senator], as a senior Senator in the party to find a strong replacement and push other Senators to replace Schumer with someone who can lead us during this emergency.”
Likewise, if I’m talking with my Indivisible group, I’m going to suggest we all write some variation on the above and push that priority out to the larger Indivisible organization.
The other thing that is important about communicating in this way is that the Democrats who are doing the right things will completely ignore the requests and demands of people who lump them in with the whole party. That isn’t about feelings - it’s about prioritization. No individual politician can make happen every request or demand that their constituents send them, even if they agree with them. They have to prioritize the requests/demands that are specific, actionable, and align with the direction from other constituents. If we lump them in with other Democrats who are doing stupid, corrupt, or ineffective shit, they are going to ignore us. If we tell them that we’re done with the Democratic Party, they are going to ignore us. That doesn’t mean we don’t express anger or frustration; it just means that anger or frustration needs to be channeled in a specific, actionable way.
If you’re frustrated with Democratic leadership, then say so. If you are angry about corruption in the DNC, say so. If you think a particular Dem is complicit then say so. But if you lump them all together in that message, they will ignore you. Anyone who is actively working to return democracy to the US and fight the regime will write you off as not being part of the solution. Because, again, whether we like it or not, the current political reality in the US is that the only vehicle (short of total breakdown of our Constitutional order) out of this fascist takeover is the Democratic Party. New parties take decades to form and build up the structure and resources to become viable. And we don’t have decades. We have months if we’re lucky.
But I also saw Biden growing increasingly impatient with Israel and openly defying them more (airdrops and the supply docks directly to Gaza) and held out some hope for what a Harris administration could achieve with a more aggressive stance.
