The Party might as well be working for the enemy

[Lys]

So three weeks ago i encountered two articles published three days apart on The Observer. Both of them basically say the exact same thing: Our Party Establishment is so bad at actually pursuing the Agenda, they may as well be working for the Enemy. By itself this is not remarkable, people say that all the time. What makes it special is that one article is talking about the Democratic party, and the other about the Republican party. The mirrored disgust is something to behold, as is the strong conviction that if the respective parties need to radicalise further or risk collapse.

The first is If Progressives Don’t Wake Up to How Awful Obama Was, Their Movement Will Fail, by Caitlin Johnstone, published May 2.
The second is Welcome to Hell, Republicans, by Brian Darling, published May 5.

They should be a fairly quick read, especially the second, but they read best together.

[General Havoc]

Right, because what the country needs now is more radicalization among political types. Because I want spending enough of my time concerned about having firebomb thrown through my window.

[Lys]

Obviously not, but it's weird to see articles being published by both sides to the effect that the political class is too moderate. Washington has been remarkably less friendly of late. There's more hostility between Congressmen, fewer bipartisan initiatives, and little willingness to compromise. It's resulted in a Congress that is in a seemingly eternal deadlock. So it's an odd perspective to see partisans of both sides accusing them of being in bed with the enemy. Yet in a sense they're not wrong, there is actually a very broad consensus in Washington as to how the country should be run. Much of the argument is over the details. Which makes me realize that while things are not going well over there, they're also not as bad as i thought.