Julio Huato wrote:
But, and this is where the agreement with Louis probably ends, I don't
think that this will work if it is presented as an inflexible
decision, i.e., regardless of what may happen *in* the DP. We have to
get out of our minds that political independence is the same as
mechanical, logistical, or organizational separation. It is not.
Here and now, the way to conquer political independence, in the
*class* sense, is by engaging with the DP. That's why I believe that
the independent campaign has to be carefully prepared since yesterday,
but not announced formally, until after the DP primaries.
IMHO, the way to attract the Democratic rank-and-filers (and that
decisive bunch of people who claim to be independent) is by making a
public commitment to *seriously consider endorsing* the DP candidate
*if and only if* such candidate *clearly* commits to troop withdrawal
and the progressive reform of foreign policy.
What you're describing sounds not unlike what the Working Families
Party is doing in New York. They organize around specific issues -
raising the state minimum wage, reducing drug sentences - and
selectively endorse candidates. The issue campaign helps build the
organization, and the results can materially improve people's lives.
And the endorsements, or the withholding of endorsements, do matter
in campaigns. It looks to me like a strategy worth trying more
broadly. Beats chimerical presidential campaigns out of nowhere, with
no organizational base, no organizational or political development,
and no life in years not divisible by 4.
Doug
