Gary Hoover wrote:
"To me it looks like there are four kinds of citizens in Mpls that make it
so:

1. People who don't vote due to apathy or disillusionment with a system
that will not represent them anyway.

2. Conventional voters: (heavily DFL in Mpls) who just vote according to
party loyalty, personal connections or preferences regarding specific
conventional issues. For example: local pork-barrel projects, taxes,
religious convictions related to politics, "law and order" promises -- all
as defined, managed, and offered as a menu by the party elite.

3. Less conventional voters: I include myself here as well as plenty of
DFLers and Greens and Republicans and others. These are folks who do not
accept the menu offered by the Republicratic duopoly (really a DFL monopoly
in Minneapolis). In addition, these folks think through issues and come up
with different sets of solutions.

It seems to me that the political dialogue is so tightly managed by the DFL
(would be joined by the Republicans, but so far not in Mpls local politics)
that there is no hope of a candidate winning on the basis of social justice
and/or environmental justice concerns."

Aaron Street responds:

It seems to me that if the Minneapolis DFL was the machine that you say it 
is we would have had a mayoral endorsement in one of the two past elections.

I get pretty frustrated with some people's idea that the Minneapolis DFL is 
controlled by Gary's so-called disciplined, unified "party elite". If this 
concept is meant to refer to Minneapolis DFL candidates, then why are so 
many local elections contested between DFLers (Mayor, Ward 8, Ward 10, 
etc.)? If it's meant to refer to the Party's officers, I wish you had seen 
the Minneapolis DFL Nominations Committee meetings I chaired this spring - 
we were a rag-tag group of new and veteran, young and old, connected and 
not, DFLers united only in our desire to find decent people who would work 
in the best interests of the organization. Finally, if it's meant to refer 
to "party elders" or "financiers", then why did the Kaplan's and Walter 
Mondale's endorsement of R.T. not result in his endorsement?

I submit to you that the idea of "party elite" is a cop-out, an excuse for 
not learning the process to become involved and actually affect the change 
you seek from the inside-out. My best evidence for this tactic, is the 
"Peace in the Precincts" campaign on behalf of Dennis Kucinich in 2004, 
which flooded the city's DFL caucuses with new, progressive, issue-oriented 
activists, many of whom ran for, and won leadership positions within the 
Party.

The Minneapolis DFL Party is not the monolith you claim it to be. It is an 
open, active, democratic (small "d") organization that is always willing to 
hear new voices. It does happen to be the Party of the vast majority of City 
elected officials, but that is a function of the desires of the electorate, 
not strong-arming by your "party elite".

You say you wish the "Republicrats" would work for environmental justice - 
R.T. and Peter both list the environment as one of their top priorities on 
their campaign websites.

Respectfully,

-Aaron Street
Powderhorn
(Secretary, SD61 DFL)
REMINDERS:
1. Be civil! Please read the NEW RULES at http://www.e-democracy.org/rules. If 
you think a member is in violation, contact the list manager at [EMAIL 
PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list.

2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait.

For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html
For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract
________________________________

Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn 
E-Democracy
Post messages to: mailto:[email protected]
Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls

Reply via email to