“…democratic socialism is part of what i am, it’s not all of what i am, and i think that’s a very important distinction.”
madeleine aldark thinks it’s a big tent, too!
on morning edit: i know i’m hogging the menu, but as no one else is here, i just gotta add this. someone on twitter had indicated that AOC was down w/ the russiagate stuff and worse, and i rember having seen someone simply make a reference to jeremy scahill on twitter. just now someone at ian welsh’s place linked to a video that had this link to the intercept video where scahill’s interviewing her:
“But then secondly, I think you have some of these geopolitical realities of — we now have Russia playing a very aggressive role in other nations. We have what we saw in Europe ahead of the French elections where, thankfully, they had planned for a cyberattack, but we have a lot of the destabilization of our political institutions as well. We see the role that Russia is playing in that.”
“All of these things tie back to that. You look at what’s happening in these FBI investigations and the things we’re finding and lo and behold, it’s this petrol Russian oligarch is tied directly financially to what happened in the 2016 U.S. elections.”
So when I had these conversations — I think it’s important to echo that not all military actions are what you’re discussing. In terms of what you’re discussing, probably not. The only one that, I mean, even with the surge, with Obama’s surge, I think what he was trying to do was deal with this mess of going into Afghanistan in the first place. In a sense, there are some tough spots that you’re in where when you have boots on the ground, and you have those soldiers that are there, pulling out immediately sometimes isn’t the most stabilizing course of action. So I think there, maybe. But I don’t think that these drone strikes were just.”
and just below that entry was: ‘Happy Fourth of July! The Story of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Reveals the Power of Good News About “Democratic Renewal”, jon schwarz
good golly miss molly!
INCIWEB’s ‘active fire mapping program’ (US)
‘Nationwide Protests: Pro-Immigrant Or Anti-Trump?’, zeese and flowers, popularresistance.org
“While abuse of immigrant families and their children are important reasons to protest, it is critical to be non-partisan or the pro-immigrant movement risks going the way of the anti-war movement, which is still struggling to rebuild. If the protests are framed as anti-Trump, then voters may conclude that electing Democrats will solve the problem. Both major political parties have failed immigrants in the US. We need to build national consensus for pro-immigrant policies that hold whomever is in power accountable.”
“The United States Needs A Pro-Immigration Policy To Correct Abusive Treatment of Immigrants
The beginnings of a pro-immigration policy in the United States is developing. Indeed, that word “pro-immigration” needs to become part of the political dialogue. We heard the call for a pro-immigrant policy at the Maryland State Green Party meeting this weekend. It was a phrase we had not heard in the political dialogue, but we are pleased to see it brought out into the open. Unlike the corporate duopoly, the Green Party of the United States has an excellent platform on immigration.”
“The US needs to recognize the positive impacts of policies that protect the human rights of people to move across borders. Research published this week shows that free movement of people could expand the global economy by $78 trillion.”
André Manuel Lopez Obrador (#AMLO on twitter) has likewise been beatified by the progressive left as almost but not quite, socialist. The journalists at wsws.org may be among the sole exceptions to that rule. In their latest op-ed,
following this paragraph, Don Knowland parses his victory speech. This is the video from his website, but I know barely any Español.
“López Obrador’s campaign attacks on the policies of the PRI, PAN and PRD generated popular illusions that he would provide a way out of this morass. He focused on ending corruption and poverty. He even claimed that victory would bring a fourth historic “transition” or “revolution” in Mexico, following on those of Mexican independence from Spain, the liberal reforms instituted under Benito Juarez, and the Mexican Revolution of 1910, which was deeply influenced by the Russian Revolution and promulgated land reform for the peasantry, along with an ideology of unending progress for Mexico’s “popular sectors.”
Now Greg Palast at common dreams, Dan Steinbeck at consortium news, on and on…might mention some of his more…corporate-friendly talk just before the vote, but see…that was simply to attract more votes.
Ha! Bloomberg weighs in: ‘Why it would be good to go long on Mexican Assets‘
‘Democrats fast-track Trump’s Supreme Court pick’, wsws.org, 3 July 2018