As all things organic, which the Nation and its Social Contract is, its constituent parts and composing details impel, restrain, implode then reappear in their former states or emerge as novel or a new synthesis with an entirely new character, which is what this contemporary Democratic Party is, since shedding its former status quo utility upon claim by its subjective objects and as such its subsequent redirection a death knell to its former function. Nonetheless, there have been two sorts of critiques and attacks lobbed at Democrats and Their Party by its enemies and the natural occurring organizational critique from within its ranks, both lines of critique however are again, expected and anticipated, because they are reflective, regardless of quality, of that inexorable and inevitable struggle between reaction and progress. So firstly we have had the "elitist" attack from enemies of The Democratic Party, which basically is a repurposing of that childish and nothing seems to work so I'll accuse them of being snobs futility. But what this work deals with is the combination of the "elitist" critique and its impact in shaping that natural occurring organizational rank and file introspection. There isn't any debate or dispute that historically the Democratic Party represented, asserted, pursued, supported and defended that quintessential exploitation of fellow human on which the Nations political-economy was structured, a political-economy that in its maturation became mired in suppositions that fundamentally were at odds with and impeded the development of money. Consequently as the development of money imposed its implacable dicta on political-economy, the Republican Party, who had initially been the medium and mechanism for the conveyance of the dicta and the maturation and development of money, in turn and for speculative reasons surrendered their purpose and became that which it initially opposed and struggled against, which The Democratic Party naturally replaced.
The casual and antiseptic descriptive of my former 'The Democratic Party naturally replaced' belies and cloaks the horrific events and metamorphic process of the descriptive 'The Democratic Party naturally replaced'. A lot of people were murdered, a horrendous amount of folks died, lives were ruined, existence was overturned and dramatically altered---the process itself embodied, what I earlier stated as The Democratic Party became the 'resistance', because in its assumptive function of realizing the maturation terms of money, it naturally and consequently opposed the perversions and distortions of The Nation's founding mythology. To explain, regardless of a civilization, the human condition is "social", meaning it is the objectification of expressions and relationships as value and its exchange. The Nation in its creation applied the most oppressive and regressive form of that '.....objectification of expressions and relationships as value and its exchange', notwithstanding its founding precepts and mythology. The point being, despite the negation in practice of those founding precepts, what couldn't be ignored was the essential sophisticated development of 'value and its exchange', commonly known and understood as money, which regardless of the delusions underpinning that 'negation in practice of those founding precepts', that implacable urgings of money demanded and required social honesty, in other words National progress was contingent on the emergence of opposition to those underpinning delusions, which The Democratic Party became. The emergence of The Democratic Party as that accountability medium didn't in itself indicate or imply that reason and enlightenment had suddenly slayed reaction and its delusions, but what it established was that mathematical fact and its proof of the inexorability of progress. As such its enemies in otherwords those embodying the delusions of the Nations archaic and incipient political-economy, incapable of recognizing that the progressive budding and burgeoning direction, were the organic demands of money, that same value they claimed its defense.
If the highest function of the Human Being or The People of a Social Contract is that 'objectification of expressions and relationships as value and its exchange', then its most realizing means notwithstanding asserted precepts and foundational mythologies, is that colloquial, Progress, its determination and pursuit. In other words, once upon a time, Money stood on the Gold and Silver Standard as definition of our collective grasp, cognition and acceptance of that 'objectification of expressions and relationships as value and its exchange', till we recognized it was analogous and accordingly idealistic in its capture and definition. Still a significant amount of people, despite enjoying the rewards of money's progressive evolution from its analog definitions haplessly maintain the analog narrative, thus rendering them susceptible, a virtual gullibility to the opportunistic and naive criticisms and philistine arguments opposing the evolved definition of what is money, despite the tremendous benefits and this is aptly exemplary of The Democratic Party.As The Democratic Party assumed opposition to the Nations archaic political-economy and its reaction, it became the embodiment of the Human objects, subjects of the oppression of that initial political-economy, subsequently anticipations and expectations of systemic change naturally developed and grew, meaning those newly liberated subjects of the Nations archaic political-economy had intense anticipations of actual and real life existence changes and were demanding it from Democrats and The Democratic Party, while ignoring the fact, (which is what then transformed into that critique from within The Party's ranks) that they were The Democrats, they were The Democratic Party they demanded action of, as such it was themselves they demanded action from and this inability and unwillingness to hold themselves accountable to this recognition, reveals and exposes the fact that despite the "elitist" critique lobbed against The Party by its reactionary enemies who are incapable of contending with the evolution of money and its liberating progression, this static 'inability and unwillingness to hold themselves accountable' to this incontrovertible fact is what ironically enables the "elitist" critique,with the irony being that 'The Democratic Party is made up of the 'newly liberated subjects of the Nations archaic political-economy' who sure as hell are not elite,and this is the basis of this work.Which is, the psychology that permitted their subjugation during'the Nations archaic political-economy' continued and continues through this post 1950's transformed Democratic Party. What I'm stating is, the current mainstream leadership of the Democratic Party is incapable of asserting itself in that Jacksonian manner and fashion that supported, pushed and defended its then constituencies politics and emphasis on the issue of their day, which was, "Preemption and Squatters" rights to access Land,and its passage of the "Log Cabin Bill" of 1841. The constituents and composition of Andrew Jackson's Democratic Party of the 19th century, which pursued the log cabin bill granting land to the "deplorables" of that time were "white" and were subsequently critiqued as, "Those untethered from the land, who formed the ever expanding population of landless squatters heading into the trans-Appalachian West, unleashed mixed feelings. To many minds, the migrant poor represented the United States' re-creation of Britain's most despised and impoverished class vagrants. During the Revolution, under the Articles of Confederation (the first founding document before the Constitution was adopted), Congress drew a sharp line between those entitled to the privileges of citizenship and the "paupers, vagabonds and fugitives from justice" who stood outside the national community".[excerpted from White Trash by Nancy Isenberg, quoting John R. Van Atta, SECURING THE WEST:POLITICS, PUBLIC LANDS,AND THE FATE OF THE OLD REPUBLIC, 1785-1850.In so many words what we see is a constant, which is when it suits a particular interest, which is that of maintaining political-economy, critique is formulated to attack whatever existing medium or Political Party at the time thats seeking to assert changes to terms of Social Contract. So when 19th century non-privileged and under privileged outside of mainstream "white" people wanted land they were labeled "vagabonds "and consequently this modern or contemporary composition of the Democratic Party of Working Class and Black Women, Men, Hispanic Women, Men, Native Americans, to specify its major groups, [and the reason I distinguish, Black, Hispanic and Native Americans from the real and organic class group Working Class is because they possess and have distinct interest apart from the generalities of the Working Class due to the type of political-economic forces and its tactics that formed and defined them], then the culturally oppressed and members of the Naturalized citizenry and first generation scions of émigrés are cognitive dissonantly criticized as "elitist" and not real Americans as means to dismiss and mock their inevitable demands of a rearrangement of those dishonest and dismissive terms of The Social Contract. So The Democratic Party despite being a major American political Party, representing an electoral majority of the American Population and citizenry, as that Lion in the Wizard of Oz that forgets its a Lion, responds to criticism from its Republican Party enemies and internal critique from its rank and file with that disassembling phenomena, "imposter syndrome" because of my earlier posit that these new constituents, of The Democratic Party, former subjects of the Nations archaic political-economy are still flummoxed and subordinate to the psychology that enabled the subjugation and as such collectively respond to the criticism of their "belonging" with the neurosis of acting and behaving as if the ensuing political conditions are not existentially abject. Despite the fact a sizable amount of Democrats are not necessarily of the subjugated group of the Nations archaic political-economy, still they are also muted and neutered in their assertiveness, as if there is a constant second guessing of whether their analysis and campaigns for that necessary National progress, if the Nation won't be as all those other defunct civilizations, will be embraced by non-Democratic voters. So The Party despite being on the correct and practical side of progress is relatively tepid in its presentation. I started this work with the unequivocal and unambiguous statement that the Democratic Party, contrary to its neo-feudalist insidious critics is anything but "elitist". Then I continued to show how subjugative psychology ails its rank and file from the recognition and its accountability of they are the Democratic Party and their criticism is that craven fools errand and its paternalistic finger pointing a la, Charlemagne Tha God of the Nationally syndicated Radio show, The Breakfast Club at Democratic leadership or its other extreme evidenced by Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson in their recent book ABUNDANCE, both purporting critique of National Politics as if it exist independent of reaction.
By William Thorpe
.jpg)
