Democrats told us they were the last line of defense. But after years of compromises and betrayals, have they already lost the fight? A conversation about what comes next.
I so agree. A 3rd party doesn’t have the infrastructure that we need RIGHT NOW! Let’s take over the Democratic Party. But what shall we call it? We need a snappy name (marketing is a large part of success). How ‘bout The Resist Oligarchy Coalition: The ROC
I'm not gonna lie, and it may sound super cheesy/tacky, but I like something with "America" in it, or something that at least clearly points towards it.
I think we're overdue for ripping patriotism out of the claws of the Republican Party. Like you said, Marketing matters, and like it or not, patriotism sells, as it should, especially if done honestly/morally.
I think that's unlikely to work because it would be immediately associated with communism/socialism due to some historical references and that might be an insurmountable albatross around the neck
Right on! We need leaders and people who still have integrity and speak up for the regular working joe or jill who lives paycheck to paycheck. I suggest Bernie, AOC, Chris Murphy, Tina Smith, maybe even Lisa Murkowski. Get some women at the top -- I am so tired of fat, pasty white guys!
The misogyny for sure runs deep in the American veins. It's rather unfortunate. If I remember it right when you poll white American women, they seem to always vote against a woman being president.
Well worth vigorous discussion and reasoned debate. May have some further thoughts later; for now, I'm more on board with the "hostile takeover" idea. I confess that ideas I would not have accepted a year ago, or even six months ago, I think are an absolute necessity, and right now. We need brainstorming, and lots of it! We need an instant revival of the too-long-forgotten and highly effective brainstorming from the '60s and '70s, and I'm old enough to have been there - and saw it.
Welcome to the Manifesto Wayne (I think this is the first time I see your comment—forgive me if I'm mistaken)
Brainstorming is the name of the game here. That's a lot of what this collab with Lady Libertie is about and a lot of what the American Manifesto is about. So, any ideas are welcome!
I've put quite a few ideas down throughout my articles too. Overall, I think the key is building an offensive messaging strategy that puts the other side under scrutiny, rather than the opposite, which has been the status quo for the last few decades.
I like the idea of a counter-party within the Democratic Party to try to stop this train wreck. I just don’t know that there is time.
Everyone keeps tossing out ideas that fit the usual political arena at a time when the other side has made it clear that they are playing a completely different game. They took years—decades. We have until the defiance of the courts is absolute & clear.
The Weis law-firm’s acquiescence & the administration’s defiance of the judges stepped us up to the next level. The Constitution is broken.
Then we see how the military handles all the broken checks & balances. The military seems to be the final solution. Is there even a mechanism that triggers it to step in?
Does he have enough infiltrators to render this country a complete dictatorship? Or are there enough soldiers & officers to overpower the infiltrators & arrest him, Elmo, & all their enablers? And what then? Who will preside once he/they are subdued?
The answers determine how we have to proceed. Without the courts, anything we do has to be underground. Otherwise, it’s El Salvador for us—if not immediate death.
While there is time,…
Definitely a name: Americans for Democracy Party? America’s Constitutional Democratic Party?
Definitely a message: Take Back America? Save the Constitution & Democracy? Reinstate Jobs, Stabilize the Economy , and Repay Social Security?
Definitely a brand: ????
Unity is a nice idea, but I want diversity, which doesn’t always garner unity. We need ALL the groups to unite to take our country back, but after that…
Eventually, I want to redefine our House of Representatives (at the very least) to actually proportionally represent the diversity within the country.
I don’t say this just to advance diversity equity & inclusion. Rather, to truly be a representative democracy—of, for, & by the people.
That means there needs to be people to represents as many of the diverse groups as possible.
The other reason for this proportional representation is to create other parties so that the two major parties have to form coalitions to get things done.
In the meantime, the idea that everyone’s voice matters needs to be made clear.
Ok. That’s all I have so far.
Oh—one more thing. Grassroots community conversations nationwide. We need people in every state on the ground organizing. The internet is not safe if anyone is without a VPN & other forms of encryption.
If our Dem leaders are not already sending out a shadow organizer to get the word out among the various party lines & clubs in their districts, I don’t see how we can.
Unfortunately, you are right. If Hillary, a brilliant and extremely experienced woman, couldn't win, no woman can. Misogyny runs deep in this country, but I do believe we can remake the Democratic party into the America Party with some amazing men and win with them.
I respectfully disagree with this take. While misogyny surely cost both Secretary Clinton and Vice President Harris votes and I get the frustration with that, it was not the only reason these candidates lost. In the 2024 election, Elisa Slotkin won statewide in Michigan and Tammy Baldwin won statewide in Wisconsin while Trump carried both states. Secretary Clinton and Vice President Harris are the only two female nominees we’ve had for president, but they were also both Senators from extremely Democratic states who had underperformed the rest of their party in past elections; the candidates best at winning Democratic primaries in heavily Democratic states aren’t necessarily the best for winning general elections in swing states.
I believe that a Democratic woman could win the U.S. presidency today. And would have in the last several elections if the Democratic Party had nominated stronger candidates. It’s not so much about qualifications as campaign skill. Governors Gretchen Whitmer from Michigan, Laura Kelly or Kathleen Sebelius from Kansas, Katie Hobbs from Arizona, as well as Senators Tammy Baldwin from Wisconsin, Jacky Rosen from Nevada, Amy Globuchar from Minnesota, and Elisa Slotkin from Michigan have all won tough elections in battleground or even Republican states. It is possible; just not with anointed candidates from safe seats who have never really been battleground tested.
You make several excellent points. I agree with you and am happy to see the names of women, a few that I don't know, but who have been battleground tested. Even though I did vote for Harris, I felt like she was being pushed down my throat. She was anointed before many of us knew much about her or her qualifications.
Agree - the Democratic Party needs to return to working for the people. The people are workers. Workers are women, minorities, veterans, men, trans, union members, churchgoers, & everything in between. They must play hardball & organize a unified message. The name of the party doesn't need to change, just the philosophy of leadership/organizing. Time to invest in the states, locals & build a coalition.
I like, no check that, I love this idea! Democratic party for the working people! We will always have the majority…more of us than them! As in more worker bees than one queen! Something we should entertain to stop this hideous group of rich assholes being manipulated by the dumbest dip shit ever to invade and breathe in our airspace!
I'm in but how do we win against corporate DNC candidates?
Jose Vega had popular support but no chance of primarying the establishment tool because the primaries are crooked.
Rfk Jr faced the same crap. They make the rules and can change them at any time.
The tea party was a false revolution, funded by the Koch Bros and other big interests.
It went along with mainstream Republicans with war etc.
The only valid movement was with Matt Gaetz, Boebert, and a few others. They did what the squad didn't... Get concessions from the speaker. And BTW why do we have such thing as a speaker monopolizing the floor? Frak that.
We saw what they did to Gaetz. It's not hard for them to play that game, while allowing demons to continue their terms in Congress.
Anyway, Trump was the fake right progressive.
Bernie was the fake left progressive.
Both had huge support.
If a real progressive could get past the primaries, the end of the bullshit is near.
I mean... Gaetz and Boebert are not exactly role models we should be aspiring to, unless you're going to heavily qualify that we need to push as hard as they did to get concessions. In that narrow case, I would agree. Otherwise, they're highly corrupt/morally bankrupt.
How's Bernie a fake progressive? He's been saying the same thing for decades, and all of it aligns with history.
What would you even consider a real progressive? I hope you're not talking about Gaetz, RFK Jr. and Boebert... You've said some interesting things so far, but if that's your stance, it'll be hard to take you seriously.
Bernie bent the knee to Biden after they screwed him. Ok fine... But he did it with no concessions.
Then, during COVID, he didn't vote against the cares act... So it passed. It was the biggest upward transfer of wealth ever.
Oh and then he proceeded to go along with the clot shots.
I'm not sure what the real progressive will be.
Kennedy has lost me when he went full on fascist regarding the middle east. He's not using his power now to stop the con-vid emergency which was extended to 2029. Like Bernie, he talks some good things but doesn't do anything solid.
Lol, as much as I am against the Israeli genocide, the dude in the video makes it sound like Hamas killing civilians = armed resistance. It's an unserious position.
Were they lifted into power by Bibi because he wanted chaos in Palestine? Yes
Were they elected by the people? Yes
Are they good people? Not really.
Also, clot shots? lol... Please tell me you're not an anti-vaxxer...
I'd probably have to write an entire article on what a progressive is, so I'm not even going to try to do that here.
But to answer your question, Bernie certainly is a progressive. You're never going to find someone who perfectly fits an ideological label. It's a spectrum, but he definitely falls within that band of it.
The vaccine lost effectiveness as the virus mutated into different variants. That's literally how vaccines work, and has been known to do exactly that for decades...
I didn't change my morals. I'm saying someone doesn't stop being a progressive because of 1 bad take/decision/position. Purity tests are for demented idiots.
I agree, either path will be hard and met with oposition but as much as I do hate the reality of this situation this country is stuck on its 2 party system.
If anyone needs evidence for that go count how many 3rd parties there actually are out there - its a lot more than 1 but we as a society can't be bothered to count.... the 4th, 5th, 6th exc are all the 3rd per good 'ol USA logic...
Here, here!!!! Spot on!!! As an "older person " I've struggled with explaining this to younger people over the years. Their idealism and energy is truly important and how I miss having it myself before the world's monsters damaged me. We need that energy! We need that idealism! We also need a smart, focused,measured plan and construct in order to win. As I said during my teaching years "Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater!!!!" That solves nothing!
Unity is an interesting. I think my itself it feels somewhat vague. I'm also looking at the reply below from An American Nobody @alsoanamericannobody, and I'm wondering if we could sort of put the two ideas together:
The "Unshackled Sovereign Americans" Party (USA Party)
"Unshackled from Corruption. Bound by Unity" — motto/tagline
I think it sounds really powerful, especially because it gives the ability to use "unshackled" as a short reference "We're the unshackled" sounds mighty powerful. It also ties into the idea that for too long the greedy/powerful have "shackled" OUR country with corruption by dividing and conquering us, and that time ends now, we are taking back control—hence Sovereign.
I can see some powerful imagery around it too, like hands clasped together as chains are broken
We need something that comes across as unapologetic, distinct from the current spineless party that we have today
America is already sovereign, but controlled by corporate greed/corruption, so I think that Sovereign only works as a modifier to Americans. "United" is too vague, united by what? United in what? Like you said, United for Sovereign Americans sounds long, and is conceptually complex, because that means that is one group united for another group, rather than a single group.
My concept is the definition of the words. Sovereign denotes strength. Shackles denotes confinement. But certainly breaking chains could be incorporated in literature.
Consider the attention span and comprehension of the electorate.
Hmmm... When I think Sovereign, my mind goes to "under one's own control, rather than another" (it goes beyond just strength). In this sense, unshackled operates as a modifier to Sovereign, meaning, specifying that before being Sovereign, we were shackled—by what is explained directly in the motto, by corruption.
I threw this together as a concept to give an idea of what I mean:
Hmmm... could you give me an example of a group that doesn't see itself held back, i.e., shackled by corruption?
Working/Middle class = shackled by low wages / debt / inability to build wealth
LGBTQ+ = shackled by laws that claim they don't/shouldn't exist
African-Americans = shackled by systemic racism both as the outcome of being held back in the past (like redlining) and current
Women = shackled by the persistent attacks on bodily autonomy
.
.
.
Even MAGA feels shackled by the swamp (even if their overlords are the biggest swamp monsters ever who have brainwashed their base)
I could probably list several others, all who are shackled by a system controlled/designed by the ultra rich to keep us divided and distracted
Now, to the extent that some people may be shackled but not "realize" it, isn't that precisely the reason for messaging, to create awareness and to engage and resonate emotionally?
How does one expect another to rise up to break from their chains if we can't even talk about the chains, or if we're afraid of talking about the chains? It sounds a lot like the Schumer strategy, i.e., to call the other side a threat to democracy in one breath and to call them the "colleagues on the other side" with the next.
The more thought I put into this the more i think that the unease that you guys feel about the term "unshackled", or even something else altogether that creates the same feeling is, in a way, precisely what this moment demands. The current status quo should make people feel uneasy. Anything that is going to counter it successfully likely needs to address it unapologetically and head on.
We've tried "hope and change", we've tried "when they go low we go high." These kind of koombaya messages gave us full blown fascism and Trump because, I think more than anything else, that they ooze of weakness, cowardness and fear; that we're not willing to rise to the moment, or to recognize the seriousness of it.
I don't presume to know your feelings better than you, but I welcome you to consider whether the feeling you get when you see something like "unshackled" is something that is akin to fight or flight you get deep in your stomach when things get scary, and whether that isn't precisely what we need in the scary times we are living in. Look at the MEMO Trump just sent out to the AG yesterday. They're coming for ALL the lawyers currently slowing them down in the courts.
I don't say all this to be argumentative or because I'm particularly attached to the term "unshackled," but because I'm 100% certain that another koombaya message isn't going to achieve anything different than the same failure of every koombaya message up until now.
Sorry if I come across confrontational, but I'm very passionate about this and I'm confident this, whatever we all, not just in the Manifesto but as a "counter-movement", is our last shot to save America from becoming another Russia
Oh another way in which unshackled should resonate is not just to look back where we're coming from but where we are going. The current regime is seeking to shackle us all in a future where there's no freedom or liberty. A party whose name includes unshackled is a clear sign of resistance to such a future. So even those who don't see themselves as shackled now should be able to see themselves as resisting to becoming shackled
Thanks for sharing some of your experience. It's greatly appreciated.
I'm not married to the term "unshackled," let's talk about something else that carries the same sentiment. I haven't been able to come up with one as of yet. My mind just keeps going back to unshackled the more I try to get away from it lol.
Even within the examples you offered, I see the shackles everywhere:
"Wages are criminally low, working hours are long and arduous, and OSHA is nowhere to be found...yet, these people—these staunch MAGA supporters—will fight tooth and nail to defend their right to be exploited." That seems like they're shackled not only by their employers, but by their own mindset that they've developed to cope with their living conditions.
Again, I'm not saying this to stick to unshackled, just to explain why my mind keeps going to it.
I'm happy to try and come up with another terms that implies something to the effect of "breaking free from oppression" that is specific enough to carry that sentiment while not being so specific that it can't be applied generally.
I say we stay with the party that has such strong identification for so many, but it has to change to support working people. Labels matter. But “progressive” to many ordinary people means woke ideology, which became repugnant to many working class people. “Bernie Sanders’ progressivism,” yes.
Also, we are in need of some STRONG personalities to take the lead and become the voice of a populist Democratic Party.
I so agree. A 3rd party doesn’t have the infrastructure that we need RIGHT NOW! Let’s take over the Democratic Party. But what shall we call it? We need a snappy name (marketing is a large part of success). How ‘bout The Resist Oligarchy Coalition: The ROC
I'm not gonna lie, and it may sound super cheesy/tacky, but I like something with "America" in it, or something that at least clearly points towards it.
I think we're overdue for ripping patriotism out of the claws of the Republican Party. Like you said, Marketing matters, and like it or not, patriotism sells, as it should, especially if done honestly/morally.
The People's Party?
I think that's unlikely to work because it would be immediately associated with communism/socialism due to some historical references and that might be an insurmountable albatross around the neck
Right on! We need leaders and people who still have integrity and speak up for the regular working joe or jill who lives paycheck to paycheck. I suggest Bernie, AOC, Chris Murphy, Tina Smith, maybe even Lisa Murkowski. Get some women at the top -- I am so tired of fat, pasty white guys!
So we can live through a third democratic woman being demolished by American voters? I fear we have to get real about our fellow Americans.
The misogyny for sure runs deep in the American veins. It's rather unfortunate. If I remember it right when you poll white American women, they seem to always vote against a woman being president.
Not I and not my close circle of friends. But sadly I know it's true in certain circles ( not my close) and family . The white Bible belt for one.
Well worth vigorous discussion and reasoned debate. May have some further thoughts later; for now, I'm more on board with the "hostile takeover" idea. I confess that ideas I would not have accepted a year ago, or even six months ago, I think are an absolute necessity, and right now. We need brainstorming, and lots of it! We need an instant revival of the too-long-forgotten and highly effective brainstorming from the '60s and '70s, and I'm old enough to have been there - and saw it.
Welcome to the Manifesto Wayne (I think this is the first time I see your comment—forgive me if I'm mistaken)
Brainstorming is the name of the game here. That's a lot of what this collab with Lady Libertie is about and a lot of what the American Manifesto is about. So, any ideas are welcome!
I've put quite a few ideas down throughout my articles too. Overall, I think the key is building an offensive messaging strategy that puts the other side under scrutiny, rather than the opposite, which has been the status quo for the last few decades.
Nope, first time, correcto. I'm relatively new here, but convinced I've been prepared for this moment all my life. I'll be here.👍
I was there, too. And 'hostile takeover' is something to consider.
I like the idea of a counter-party within the Democratic Party to try to stop this train wreck. I just don’t know that there is time.
Everyone keeps tossing out ideas that fit the usual political arena at a time when the other side has made it clear that they are playing a completely different game. They took years—decades. We have until the defiance of the courts is absolute & clear.
The Weis law-firm’s acquiescence & the administration’s defiance of the judges stepped us up to the next level. The Constitution is broken.
Then we see how the military handles all the broken checks & balances. The military seems to be the final solution. Is there even a mechanism that triggers it to step in?
Does he have enough infiltrators to render this country a complete dictatorship? Or are there enough soldiers & officers to overpower the infiltrators & arrest him, Elmo, & all their enablers? And what then? Who will preside once he/they are subdued?
The answers determine how we have to proceed. Without the courts, anything we do has to be underground. Otherwise, it’s El Salvador for us—if not immediate death.
While there is time,…
Definitely a name: Americans for Democracy Party? America’s Constitutional Democratic Party?
Definitely a message: Take Back America? Save the Constitution & Democracy? Reinstate Jobs, Stabilize the Economy , and Repay Social Security?
Definitely a brand: ????
Unity is a nice idea, but I want diversity, which doesn’t always garner unity. We need ALL the groups to unite to take our country back, but after that…
Eventually, I want to redefine our House of Representatives (at the very least) to actually proportionally represent the diversity within the country.
I don’t say this just to advance diversity equity & inclusion. Rather, to truly be a representative democracy—of, for, & by the people.
That means there needs to be people to represents as many of the diverse groups as possible.
The other reason for this proportional representation is to create other parties so that the two major parties have to form coalitions to get things done.
In the meantime, the idea that everyone’s voice matters needs to be made clear.
Ok. That’s all I have so far.
Oh—one more thing. Grassroots community conversations nationwide. We need people in every state on the ground organizing. The internet is not safe if anyone is without a VPN & other forms of encryption.
If our Dem leaders are not already sending out a shadow organizer to get the word out among the various party lines & clubs in their districts, I don’t see how we can.
Now I’m done.
"Take back America" is a great message for the immediate challenge, its short and simultaneously states the goal and the problem.
Unfortunately, you are right. If Hillary, a brilliant and extremely experienced woman, couldn't win, no woman can. Misogyny runs deep in this country, but I do believe we can remake the Democratic party into the America Party with some amazing men and win with them.
I respectfully disagree with this take. While misogyny surely cost both Secretary Clinton and Vice President Harris votes and I get the frustration with that, it was not the only reason these candidates lost. In the 2024 election, Elisa Slotkin won statewide in Michigan and Tammy Baldwin won statewide in Wisconsin while Trump carried both states. Secretary Clinton and Vice President Harris are the only two female nominees we’ve had for president, but they were also both Senators from extremely Democratic states who had underperformed the rest of their party in past elections; the candidates best at winning Democratic primaries in heavily Democratic states aren’t necessarily the best for winning general elections in swing states.
I believe that a Democratic woman could win the U.S. presidency today. And would have in the last several elections if the Democratic Party had nominated stronger candidates. It’s not so much about qualifications as campaign skill. Governors Gretchen Whitmer from Michigan, Laura Kelly or Kathleen Sebelius from Kansas, Katie Hobbs from Arizona, as well as Senators Tammy Baldwin from Wisconsin, Jacky Rosen from Nevada, Amy Globuchar from Minnesota, and Elisa Slotkin from Michigan have all won tough elections in battleground or even Republican states. It is possible; just not with anointed candidates from safe seats who have never really been battleground tested.
You make several excellent points. I agree with you and am happy to see the names of women, a few that I don't know, but who have been battleground tested. Even though I did vote for Harris, I felt like she was being pushed down my throat. She was anointed before many of us knew much about her or her qualifications.
Agree - the Democratic Party needs to return to working for the people. The people are workers. Workers are women, minorities, veterans, men, trans, union members, churchgoers, & everything in between. They must play hardball & organize a unified message. The name of the party doesn't need to change, just the philosophy of leadership/organizing. Time to invest in the states, locals & build a coalition.
I like, no check that, I love this idea! Democratic party for the working people! We will always have the majority…more of us than them! As in more worker bees than one queen! Something we should entertain to stop this hideous group of rich assholes being manipulated by the dumbest dip shit ever to invade and breathe in our airspace!
I'm in but how do we win against corporate DNC candidates?
Jose Vega had popular support but no chance of primarying the establishment tool because the primaries are crooked.
Rfk Jr faced the same crap. They make the rules and can change them at any time.
The tea party was a false revolution, funded by the Koch Bros and other big interests.
It went along with mainstream Republicans with war etc.
The only valid movement was with Matt Gaetz, Boebert, and a few others. They did what the squad didn't... Get concessions from the speaker. And BTW why do we have such thing as a speaker monopolizing the floor? Frak that.
We saw what they did to Gaetz. It's not hard for them to play that game, while allowing demons to continue their terms in Congress.
Anyway, Trump was the fake right progressive.
Bernie was the fake left progressive.
Both had huge support.
If a real progressive could get past the primaries, the end of the bullshit is near.
I mean... Gaetz and Boebert are not exactly role models we should be aspiring to, unless you're going to heavily qualify that we need to push as hard as they did to get concessions. In that narrow case, I would agree. Otherwise, they're highly corrupt/morally bankrupt.
How's Bernie a fake progressive? He's been saying the same thing for decades, and all of it aligns with history.
What would you even consider a real progressive? I hope you're not talking about Gaetz, RFK Jr. and Boebert... You've said some interesting things so far, but if that's your stance, it'll be hard to take you seriously.
Bernie bent the knee to Biden after they screwed him. Ok fine... But he did it with no concessions.
Then, during COVID, he didn't vote against the cares act... So it passed. It was the biggest upward transfer of wealth ever.
Oh and then he proceeded to go along with the clot shots.
I'm not sure what the real progressive will be.
Kennedy has lost me when he went full on fascist regarding the middle east. He's not using his power now to stop the con-vid emergency which was extended to 2029. Like Bernie, he talks some good things but doesn't do anything solid.
Judge them by what they do, not what they say.
Lol, as much as I am against the Israeli genocide, the dude in the video makes it sound like Hamas killing civilians = armed resistance. It's an unserious position.
Were they lifted into power by Bibi because he wanted chaos in Palestine? Yes
Were they elected by the people? Yes
Are they good people? Not really.
Also, clot shots? lol... Please tell me you're not an anti-vaxxer...
I'd probably have to write an entire article on what a progressive is, so I'm not even going to try to do that here.
But to answer your question, Bernie certainly is a progressive. You're never going to find someone who perfectly fits an ideological label. It's a spectrum, but he definitely falls within that band of it.
Ok so have you got every booster?
Anti vax? I thought only the fascists dismiss points by calling names.
And then you change your morals re Palestine to believe Bernie is a good guy? Name me one thing he did for us.
Please explain why the squad didn't force m4a when they could have held it over Pelosi's vote. Gaetz at least did that. Not the fraud squad.
Bye Felicia.
Got every single booster, yes.
The vaccine lost effectiveness as the virus mutated into different variants. That's literally how vaccines work, and has been known to do exactly that for decades...
I didn't change my morals. I'm saying someone doesn't stop being a progressive because of 1 bad take/decision/position. Purity tests are for demented idiots.
Bernie supporting the genocide. Video by the blackout network.
https://youtube.com/shorts/R4tLhOk6tFc
So what exactly makes you think that he's progressive??
I’m all in! 110%!
Another article relevant to this discussion makes some good & similar points.
https://open.substack.com/pub/thebulwark/p/how-to-think-and-act-like-a-dissident-in-trumps-america?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=3lwz5b
I agree, either path will be hard and met with oposition but as much as I do hate the reality of this situation this country is stuck on its 2 party system.
If anyone needs evidence for that go count how many 3rd parties there actually are out there - its a lot more than 1 but we as a society can't be bothered to count.... the 4th, 5th, 6th exc are all the 3rd per good 'ol USA logic...
Yes, but HOW do we begun NOW? Voting, if it still lives, is too infrequent.
Here, here!!!! Spot on!!! As an "older person " I've struggled with explaining this to younger people over the years. Their idealism and energy is truly important and how I miss having it myself before the world's monsters damaged me. We need that energy! We need that idealism! We also need a smart, focused,measured plan and construct in order to win. As I said during my teaching years "Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater!!!!" That solves nothing!
How about the UNITY party? Who wouldn't support unity?
Unity is an interesting. I think my itself it feels somewhat vague. I'm also looking at the reply below from An American Nobody @alsoanamericannobody, and I'm wondering if we could sort of put the two ideas together:
The "Unshackled Sovereign Americans" Party (USA Party)
"Unshackled from Corruption. Bound by Unity" — motto/tagline
I think it sounds really powerful, especially because it gives the ability to use "unshackled" as a short reference "We're the unshackled" sounds mighty powerful. It also ties into the idea that for too long the greedy/powerful have "shackled" OUR country with corruption by dividing and conquering us, and that time ends now, we are taking back control—hence Sovereign.
I can see some powerful imagery around it too, like hands clasped together as chains are broken
That's interesting. Unshackled is a bit strong for the party name (imho), but good in the motto.
Unity Saves America?
Its strength was the point of putting it there 😜
We need something that comes across as unapologetic, distinct from the current spineless party that we have today
America is already sovereign, but controlled by corporate greed/corruption, so I think that Sovereign only works as a modifier to Americans. "United" is too vague, united by what? United in what? Like you said, United for Sovereign Americans sounds long, and is conceptually complex, because that means that is one group united for another group, rather than a single group.
I see a poll coming in the future :)
A poll would be good.
Trying to be a bit delicate here, but the thought of shackles makes me shiver. And imagine what the opposition and trolls could do with that visual.
Let them try 😜
I think that being delicate is precisely the kind of thing we need to put behind us.
I'll have to sleep on this some, but I think that the broken chains imagery is extremely powerful, energizing and unifying.
My concept is the definition of the words. Sovereign denotes strength. Shackles denotes confinement. But certainly breaking chains could be incorporated in literature.
Consider the attention span and comprehension of the electorate.
Sleep well. Thanks for the conversation.
Sure, but that's why it's UNshackled.
Hmmm... When I think Sovereign, my mind goes to "under one's own control, rather than another" (it goes beyond just strength). In this sense, unshackled operates as a modifier to Sovereign, meaning, specifying that before being Sovereign, we were shackled—by what is explained directly in the motto, by corruption.
I threw this together as a concept to give an idea of what I mean:
https://imgur.com/a/LRiBknz
https://imgur.com/a/LdnlAl4
The second one has United instead of Unshackled
Hmmm... could you give me an example of a group that doesn't see itself held back, i.e., shackled by corruption?
Working/Middle class = shackled by low wages / debt / inability to build wealth
LGBTQ+ = shackled by laws that claim they don't/shouldn't exist
African-Americans = shackled by systemic racism both as the outcome of being held back in the past (like redlining) and current
Women = shackled by the persistent attacks on bodily autonomy
.
.
.
Even MAGA feels shackled by the swamp (even if their overlords are the biggest swamp monsters ever who have brainwashed their base)
I could probably list several others, all who are shackled by a system controlled/designed by the ultra rich to keep us divided and distracted
Now, to the extent that some people may be shackled but not "realize" it, isn't that precisely the reason for messaging, to create awareness and to engage and resonate emotionally?
How does one expect another to rise up to break from their chains if we can't even talk about the chains, or if we're afraid of talking about the chains? It sounds a lot like the Schumer strategy, i.e., to call the other side a threat to democracy in one breath and to call them the "colleagues on the other side" with the next.
The more thought I put into this the more i think that the unease that you guys feel about the term "unshackled", or even something else altogether that creates the same feeling is, in a way, precisely what this moment demands. The current status quo should make people feel uneasy. Anything that is going to counter it successfully likely needs to address it unapologetically and head on.
We've tried "hope and change", we've tried "when they go low we go high." These kind of koombaya messages gave us full blown fascism and Trump because, I think more than anything else, that they ooze of weakness, cowardness and fear; that we're not willing to rise to the moment, or to recognize the seriousness of it.
I don't presume to know your feelings better than you, but I welcome you to consider whether the feeling you get when you see something like "unshackled" is something that is akin to fight or flight you get deep in your stomach when things get scary, and whether that isn't precisely what we need in the scary times we are living in. Look at the MEMO Trump just sent out to the AG yesterday. They're coming for ALL the lawyers currently slowing them down in the courts.
I don't say all this to be argumentative or because I'm particularly attached to the term "unshackled," but because I'm 100% certain that another koombaya message isn't going to achieve anything different than the same failure of every koombaya message up until now.
Sorry if I come across confrontational, but I'm very passionate about this and I'm confident this, whatever we all, not just in the Manifesto but as a "counter-movement", is our last shot to save America from becoming another Russia
Oh another way in which unshackled should resonate is not just to look back where we're coming from but where we are going. The current regime is seeking to shackle us all in a future where there's no freedom or liberty. A party whose name includes unshackled is a clear sign of resistance to such a future. So even those who don't see themselves as shackled now should be able to see themselves as resisting to becoming shackled
Thanks for sharing some of your experience. It's greatly appreciated.
I'm not married to the term "unshackled," let's talk about something else that carries the same sentiment. I haven't been able to come up with one as of yet. My mind just keeps going back to unshackled the more I try to get away from it lol.
Even within the examples you offered, I see the shackles everywhere:
"Wages are criminally low, working hours are long and arduous, and OSHA is nowhere to be found...yet, these people—these staunch MAGA supporters—will fight tooth and nail to defend their right to be exploited." That seems like they're shackled not only by their employers, but by their own mindset that they've developed to cope with their living conditions.
Again, I'm not saying this to stick to unshackled, just to explain why my mind keeps going to it.
I'm happy to try and come up with another terms that implies something to the effect of "breaking free from oppression" that is specific enough to carry that sentiment while not being so specific that it can't be applied generally.
I agree. Your input has been so valuable to this conversation! We need a brainstorming session on this idea.
Wait. United Sovereign America. Or Americans.
United for Sovereign America? Kinda long. Needs to be simple and punchy. Think what people would say when asked what party they support.
This is a great idea. In fact, it may be the only idea.
I say we stay with the party that has such strong identification for so many, but it has to change to support working people. Labels matter. But “progressive” to many ordinary people means woke ideology, which became repugnant to many working class people. “Bernie Sanders’ progressivism,” yes.
Also, we are in need of some STRONG personalities to take the lead and become the voice of a populist Democratic Party.