From time to time, I have argued that most leftists are actually reactionaries. That would explain, for instance, their support for 19th century forms of transportation, such as rail transit and trolleys, or their support for the kind of government welfare schemes pioneered by Bismark in 19th century Germany.
But I had not realized that some leftists have gone even farther and want to bring back the bad old days of political machines. Or, to be more exact, I had not realized that they admit this openly.
For many activists already involved in Democratic politics, the permanent campaign is an extension of their enthusiasm for Howard Dean's reformist candidacy in 2004. But the emergence of another organization named Blue Tiger Democrats shows that the new efforts actually hearken back to Tammany Hall.
That 19th-century New York political machine may be known for corruption, but it drew its true strength from being a service organization.
(Those who actually know something about Tammany Hall will recall that it was an important political organization until the 1960s.)
But now that David Sirota brings this up, I can see why Tammany Hall appeals to him. Political machines, such as Tammany Hall, allow insiders to make a living from politics, often a very good living. The machines subvert elections in many ways, including, from time to time, by ballot stuffing. But most of all, they try to make voters clients, dependent on the machine for favors, large and small — instead of independent citizens who can fend for themselves. They try to keep issues out of politics, and discourage voters from paying attention to how the machines enrich those who run them — at the expense of the taxpayers. A political machine run by leftists would let people like Sirota be supported by the public, without ever really answering to the voters on important issues.
So I can see why David Sirota, and similar reactionaries, would want to bring back political machines. But I can't see why any voter, who has even a little self respect, would want to help these reactionaries take us back to the bad old days.
Cross posted at Jim Miller on Politics.
(There are, of course, still political machines, though they are far less important than they once were.
If you want to know about the better side of Tammany Hall, you might want to read that little classic, Plunkitt of Tammany Hall, which you can buy here, or download free, in many places, including here. And I would recommend that everyone read my favorite political novel, Edwin O'Connor's The Last Hurrah, which describes the last campaign of a political boss.
Fun fact: Speaker Nancy Pelosi's father was an old-fashioned boss in Baltimore. I have been arguing since 2002 that you can understand her best if you assume that she is imitating her father. Here's an example, for those who wonder why I came to that conclusion.)
Posted by Jim Miller at March 05, 2008 02:07 PM | Email ThisBut today's "Progressives" really ought to be called Regressives. So many of their ideas are a total throwback to the 19th century. Many as Jim has noted, but also many others. And there's nothing progressive about racist schemes to form quotas of certain colors and races in schools and businesses, or trying to conform energy policy to politically correct forms or solar and wind, etc.
Only freedom in a market place of ideas and economic freedom will get us to a better world. We are not going to solve housing problems with "a Buyer's Bill of Rights" or transportation problems by trying to force people out of their cars. Force does not motivate humans.
But that's all we get from the left. Forced bad ideas, based on 19th century failures.
Posted by: Jeff B. on March 5, 2008 03:08 PMhttp://www.post-gazette.com/pg/07245/813801-373.stm
Posted by: Obi-Wan on March 5, 2008 04:30 PMSeattle rocketed up in size without ever undergoing the shakeups that happened in the aftermath of Tammany Hall. We're on the low-end of 'big city', but city government's checks and balances aren't up to the task. There's a fair amount of feelgoodism - community input requirements etc. But little-to-no teeth to anything.
Posted by: Al on March 5, 2008 05:10 PM2. One of the most efficient social service agencies in the world is the terrorist group Hamas in the Palestinian territories. It gets to be efficient because it his caused so many opportunities for real self-determination among the Palestianian people to be lost. So, they get to be the heroes in a situation of their making.
There is an analogy to the "permanent campaign" envisioned by Sirota. People is poor communties will be given "walking around money" and helped with their voting choices to keep those involved with the ideology of the "permanent campaign" in office and the very communities where votes are mined will get progressively worse and more dangerous, like the Middle East. Already in parts of LA there is regular gun fire and shooting of innocents.
3. As I have stated many times at this site, the counter to one-party rule is two competitive parties. In this state pubbies seem to have abandoned the urban areas and really don't have an effective strategy.
I don't know if it is as much machine politics as one-party rule. If anyone knows of any entity ruled by one party of any ideology that is not corrupt, I'd like to hear about it. The problem is that old economic concept of monopoly, they just fail to deliver and the people at the vulnerable end of the spectrum really get screwed.
Posted by: WVH on March 5, 2008 09:52 PM