Let’s Build a Coalition with Movement For a People’s Party

If you had not heard there is a new and upcoming party being developed called Movement for a People’s Party. (https://peoplesparty.org/) It has over 100,000 members and is growing and building coalitions with organizations favored by Andrew Yang (Humanity Forward & Income Movement) and Bernie Sanders (Our Revolution). Their plan is to have candidates by 2022 and to make a serious presidential run in 2024. They have the pieces in place to register in every state as a political party as opposed to just registering individual candidates since this makes it easy to be taken off of the ballot like how the Democrats have successfully kicked off Greens in Wisconsin and other states. This political party has all the components to be very successful but the one thing I fear that is missing in a formula to be truly successful is more representation of our friends on the right side of the political spectrum. I can see all of us getting together to have true honest discussions based on our political beliefs with our common interests at heart as proud Americans with love of our country and values of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights in mind solving issues and problems together.

Overall, I ask you, Are you ready to form a coalition with Movement for a People’s Party?

3 Likes

No, I would not want to partner because I am center right, and this would not represent my views at all. I would have to leave the Unity movement if we partnered with these groups because it would be more heavily slanted towards those with center left views.

4 Likes

I am not in favor of any new party at this point in the game. I have zero faith that any third party can compete against the power, money, and greed of the duopoly. Until we redefine or rid ourselves of the paradigm of right and left, the duopoly will persist and we will suffer.

2 Likes

Ballot access and 5% polling is the priority. They seem to have the numbers to get it. I’ll support anything to end the corrupt duopoly.

1 Like

I’m currently making a podcast right now explaining why we need two parties and how they can better serve the people’s interests. What you’re suggesting doesn’t seem like it would help people, it’s just the same critique I’ve given certain outspoken people in this movement which I’ve perceived as disenchanted Democrats attempting to take back their party.

Just for clarification, when you say we need 2 parties are you saying we need 2 parties, do you mean we keep the 2 parties (Democrats and Republicans), reform the 2 parties, create 2 new parties, or something else?

1 Like

I guess my question would be how would we break away from the corporate duopoly we have right now without unifying all people from political affiliations of left, right, and everyone in between?

Would the Unity movement acting alone have the resources to take on the resources of those of the Democrats and Republicans?

I guess I ask this based on personal observations that whenever a 3rd party or any other movement outside of their control is started they work together to crush it or co-opt it. Also, the elites are good at divide and conquer. The way I see it, our only shot to truly reform this country is to work together.

Granted I understand the argument of compromise but are the compromises so much that either Democrat or Republican offer more by joining forces with Movement for a people’s party? (I am just genuinely curious because I can only speak from my personal experiences and my views on how either major political party doesn’t offer anyone on the left, right, or center anything, or very little, compared to the corporate/special interests)

1 Like

Reforming the parties. Or possibly replacing one of them but I don’t know how that would work. I’ll share my podcast here and hopefully, that will explain what I mean.

1 Like

All that follows is my opinion. I do not pretend to speak for other Unity members.

What unity members have in common is our prioritization of honor, civility, and mutual interest above governmental extremism.

That is to say we are all, individually, willing to forego the pursuit of a pure realization of our favorite platforms if we can create a stable civil society that incorporates a meaningful portion of them or allows us to create bubbles in which they can exist.

This doesn’t really jive with the concept of a party. A party is an engine for realizing specific governmental platforms–the very thing most of us decided to give up when we identified with Unity.

So, if we’re going to pursue a platform, it’s natural we’d all return to the ones we’d decided to compromise when we identified with Unity.

Optimistically, while we’d likely balk at a coalition, there is still room for collaboration. More specifically, we’d have a shared interest in dismantling the barriers the electoral system has erected to protect the duopoly–i.e. ballot access, media access, federal financial assistance, etc. Those are opportunities for cooperation.

To reiterate, I don’t speak for anyone else. This is just my perspective.

2 Likes

Does “People’s Party” sound like something out of N Korea or the USSR to anyone else here? I feel it’s a moniker fail for Gen X and older…