On one hand, I would point out that many ‘easy’ fixes are not actually that easy when you consider the fucked state of our government and that the Dems are inherently a ‘big-tent’ party.
On the other hand, you’re completely correct that the Dem mainstream refuses (without being pressed) to consider anything that shakes the precious status quo because it would upset their donors, and they refuse to consider that the system might be broken and in need of fixing (though that latter point, admittedly, they share with our blinkered fucking electorate).
I would point out more broadly that though money is a MASSIVE influence in US politics, ultimately, votes are the motivator for most Dem politicians. Politicians are generally in the position because they like power, and they cling to power by re-election. If the narrative of the electorate changes, and voting patterns with it, especially primary voting patterns, Dem politicians will fall over themselves to change their stated positions. If by the next primary cycle, the Dem electorate had shifted to be a bunch of far-left radicals who demanded repeated-if-futile attempts to reform the system even with a minority in the legislature, and massacred incumbents accordingly, even ghouls like Pelosi would suddenly become champions of ‘the people’.
The mistake many people on here make is thinking that politicians in a bourgeois democracy are loyal to capital in some nebulous way, and aiming for wealth. By and large, they are not (though there are certainly exceptions, both ideological and personal). By and large, they are loyal to themselves, and aiming for power. Capital and wealth are only means to that end. As long as the support of capital buys them votes, and wealth buys them influence, they will pursue both - when capital stops guaranteeing a re-election from an electorate with the approximate memory of goldfish, mainstream politicians will change their allegiances accordingly.
HOW the fuck we get there, I have no fucking clue. But it is good to remain clear-sighted on the nature of the enemy.
On one hand, I would point out that many ‘easy’ fixes are not actually that easy when you consider the fucked state of our government and that the Dems are inherently a ‘big-tent’ party.
On the other hand, you’re completely correct that the Dem mainstream refuses (without being pressed) to consider anything that shakes the precious status quo because it would upset their donors, and they refuse to consider that the system might be broken and in need of fixing (though that latter point, admittedly, they share with our blinkered fucking electorate).
I would point out more broadly that though money is a MASSIVE influence in US politics, ultimately, votes are the motivator for most Dem politicians. Politicians are generally in the position because they like power, and they cling to power by re-election. If the narrative of the electorate changes, and voting patterns with it, especially primary voting patterns, Dem politicians will fall over themselves to change their stated positions. If by the next primary cycle, the Dem electorate had shifted to be a bunch of far-left radicals who demanded repeated-if-futile attempts to reform the system even with a minority in the legislature, and massacred incumbents accordingly, even ghouls like Pelosi would suddenly become champions of ‘the people’.
The mistake many people on here make is thinking that politicians in a bourgeois democracy are loyal to capital in some nebulous way, and aiming for wealth. By and large, they are not (though there are certainly exceptions, both ideological and personal). By and large, they are loyal to themselves, and aiming for power. Capital and wealth are only means to that end. As long as the support of capital buys them votes, and wealth buys them influence, they will pursue both - when capital stops guaranteeing a re-election from an electorate with the approximate memory of goldfish, mainstream politicians will change their allegiances accordingly.
HOW the fuck we get there, I have no fucking clue. But it is good to remain clear-sighted on the nature of the enemy.