Yoshie wrote, "This year would have been as good a year to use the Iraq War as the litmus test in a non-partisan fashion as 2004, or perhaps a better year to do so than 2004, thereby establishing a working relation between left Democrats of the sort who supported Tasini and Greens like Hawkins."
Regardless of the year, this is an understandable fantasy but can't be more than that.... By definition, "left Democrats" define themselves as institutionally part of one of the governing parties...and they see absolutely nothing to be gained from such a connection. Until they acknowledge bolting as an option, almost none of them will be interested in life outside the DP. Our day-in-day-out, tired old "unsuccessful" approach has contributed something to the fact that "left Democrats" leave the DP all the time. The paradox, of course, is that they become something other than "left Democrats" in the process...which always leaves "left Democrats" untouched by our efforts. The future of political insurgency has always depended mostly on those who've learned from experience that two-party electoral politics changes nothing. What happens in the streets does the job. Finally, the term "left Democrat" has certainly changed over time. Frankly, the current lot regularly swallow a lot that the "left Democrats" of the 1960s would probably have found unacceptable. And, as people on the left of the DP get disgusted and fade away, the "left" that remains is actually further right. Solidarity! Mark L.
