During Our Operation Hope Working Group Today we Came up with Two Questions we hoped to center our discussion next week with Cenk around. They are:
What does it mean to be anti-war? The plank says “No More Wars” but what does this mean in context? For example, if China invades Chicago then obviously the United States would have to go to war. Therefore, where should we define the limits of what wars are acceptable to fight/ fund and which are not. We would like Cenk to clarify how he thinks we should talk about this plank and publicize it.
What does the Populist Plank and the Populist movement gain from being so friendly and conciliatory with right-wingers, whether populist or not on their shows? We understand that it is important to talk with right wingers and the right-wing audience, but what is your strategy to convince them that they should support a populist candidate? Does criticizing the “far-left” help to unite together right-wing populists and left-wing populists in the way that we need in order for us to win?
This was my best approximation of trying to sum up all the thoughts and sub questions that people on the zoom had about these two questions. Let me know if you want me to make any corrections.
Thanks , Vook . A point for Cenk is that Congress has not officially declared war since 1942. All others since then have not been declared by Congress and therefore are military operations. Legally and Constitutionally , everything from Korea , Vietnam and afterwards are UnConstitutional since Congress is the only branch of government allowed to declare war . Jack
I’m sorry I missed the meeting last night (I just really wasn’t feeling up to it)! I totally agree. A lot needs to be worked out with the Populist Plank. With such a vast audience, 5,000 signatures should be nothing, but last time I checked, there weren’t even 3,500. I get that a lot of work has been put into it, but that should not be the deciding factor in moving forward with anything. If it’s broke, be strong enough to admit it and then take advice from others to make it better.
Andrea , we missed you ,yet it was in my opinion a very good and insightful meeting. Every one made good and salient points and we dived deeper on many issues, including how Cenk can do better. He will be at the next one and I hope you are well enough to attend. Jack
excellent overview of 2 of the questions we have. here are some more of the specifics of each that I’d like answers to:
is the line we defend nato members? or any ally we have made promises to? do we help nato allies in any war whether they are offensive or defensive? the war in ukraine seems way more of a defensive war than israels war with the palestinians but both claim they are defensive wars. so who do we help? do we honor the commitments of protection to our allies?
why is there suddenly a ton of nuance in how you speak about the right wing positions and very little on anyone with positions further left than you? if someone has further left positions on trans issues or crime than you, why are you painting with a broad brush all these progressives as unreasonable or unwilling to listen to anyone elses opinions? or unwelcoming in general? when you know progressives like jordan uhl and john iadarola that are further left than you and aren’t any of the things you smear them with. you know those on the left are most accepting of new ideas and people that are different than themselves. don’t let a few online figures and bots determine your opinion of the far-left/progressives. unless you are a white straight christian male huge portions of the right don’t seem very accepting to me.
why act like the left lost the last election over identarian issues instead of not delivering popular policy for the american people or even really trying to? or because they were clearly looking out for the 1% and not the 99%. Kamala did everything she could to not let identarian issues come into play.
why can’t you point out what the right and left should be fighting for together while still fighting for progressive policy and interests? is an idea wrong if it’s not popular? the populist plank needs Cenk the peacemaker but the left and progressives still need Cenk the warrior to fight for progressive interests and to show people the progressive point of view. why can’t we have both?
to anyone that reads this thank you for your time
nick mudar the happy warrior
Honestly I hesitate to say this because I don’t want to cause anymore division than already exists. Although I feel compelled to ask if we could invite Francesca to a meeting when Cenk cannot attend.
I don’t presume she would accept, although I am one extend olive branches. I don’t do this to exacerbate the conflict though, I think this could be easily viewed as a provocation. I do not intend that, I just think we could perhaps facilitate understanding.
