If you have "no place to go," come here!

The 12-point platform [beta 2]

Here's the lastest revision with no documentation -- no "bullet overlay"-- so we can see if the platform reads well, stand-alone.

The basic idea is to define "the left" operationally.

Whenever anybody claims that any major Democratic candidate is on the left, even a "neo-populist," we can test that candidate for compliance using the 12 Point Platform.

And when people on comment threads talk about "the left," we can say: "You want the left? Here's the left!" and then copy and paste in the platform below:

The 12-Point Platform
1. A Living Wage
2. Medicare for all
3. Tax the Rich

4. Job and Income Guarantee
5. Debt Jubilee
6. Retirement Security

7. Post Office Bank
8. Enforce the Bill of Rights
9. End the Wars

10. Slow Food (Too)
11. Clean Air and Water
12. Carbon Negative Economy

Supporting the 12 Points, and necessary to pass, implement, and sustain them, are 12 Reforms. Herewith, also copy and paste-ready:

The 12 Reforms
1. Net Neutrality
2. Fairness Doctrine
3. Local Ownership of Media

4. Public Campaign Financing
5. Electoral Integrity
6. Self-Organizing Web-Based Citizen Deliberation

7. MMT Macro-economic Policies
8. Preserve and Expand the Commons
9. More Co-operatives, Fewer Corporations

10. Fiat Justitia. Ruat Caelum
11. Strategic Non-Violence
12. Points and Reforms Are Indivisible

Finally, to explain, revise, or extend the 12 Points and 12 Reforms, One value:

The One Value
1. Public Purpose.

So there you have it. Shorn of all the explanations and refinements we've been talking about, and without subheads dividing individual items into buckets, does it all look appealing? How about each individual point?

Is there anybody who can't live with this the way that it is?

NOTE * Frankly, I'm not sure about "the left." The metaphor is one of linearity, left to right. But political beliefs aren't linear. The impedance mismatch between multi-dimensional political views and the legacy party system generates more heat than light.

No votes yet


mtngun's picture
Submitted by mtngun on

I like most of it and have no strong disagreements with anything. Good job.

Like you, I have moved away from the MMT JG-only toward a "Job or Income" Guarantee.

Speaking of which, I would not include your #7 Reform, MMT economic policies. I agree with much of MMT, but the bottom line is that MMT is funded by a 1%'er. A nice 1%'er, but he's still not one of us. I disagree with MMT's JG-only safety net, with their reluctance to tax the rich, and with their free trade policies. I would rewrite #7 something like "post-Keynesian" economic policies. That leaves more wiggle room and includes non-MMT economists like Steve Keen -- after all, you do give a shout out to Keen's debt jubilee.

My own personal 3 point plan is something like this:
-- fix the economy
-- end the wars
-- restore the Constitution and the Bill of Rights

I try not to dwell on divisive social issues that can alienate people. First build a power base by addressing the big 3, and then maybe you'll have the political capital to address the more controversial social and environmental issues.

Submitted by lambert on

... because I like the idea of including Steve Keen. Also, it's undeniable MMT is a hate trigger for some, sadly. And Post-Keynsian is a superset of MMT.

On the milliionaire, I think DCBlogger points out that splits in the elite are to be recognized and take advantage of; one reason we recognize the Genetic Fallacy as just that, a fallacy.

gizzardboy's picture
Submitted by gizzardboy on

I may be stupid, but number 11 zips right past me. I understand English and I know about fiat money and the Fiat Motor Company, but what number 11 reform means eludes me. Also, why is 11 placed before 10?

V. Arnold's picture
Submitted by V. Arnold on

Looks good to me (your 12 points). I've read some pretty valid sounding criticism of MMT also. I'm not a capitalist; at least in it's present form. I'm not convinced of it's long term viability and capitalism's ability in maintaining a fair distribution of wealth.
Not being an economist that's about as cogent a statement as I can make.

Submitted by lambert on

Voila. Quoting the About page nearly in full:

low Food envisions a world in which all people can access and enjoy food that is good for them, good for those who grow it and good for the planet.

We oppose the standardization of taste and culture, and the unrestrained power of food industry multinationals and industrial agriculture. 

Our approach is based on a concept of food quality that is defined by three interconnected principles: good, clean and fair.

  • GOOD: a fresh and flavorsome seasonal diet that satisfies the senses and is part of the local culture.
  • CLEAN: food production and consumption that does not harm the environment, animal welfare or human health.
  • FAIR: accessible prices for consumers and fair conditions and pay for producers.

Slow Food believes food is tied to many other aspects of life, including culture, politics, agriculture and the environment. Through our food choices we can collectively influence how food is cultivated, produced and distributed, and as a result bring about great change.

Informed and selective consumers become co-producers by demanding food that is good, clean and fair. 

So you can see Slow Food has huge implications (and feeds into a lot of stuff in the 12 Reforms like Common Pool Resources and more co-ops and fewer corps.

"Too" is there because we're not purists, and sadly, sometimes bad ("fast") food is not only all that's available to poor people, but it's also even a rational choice from a caloric standpoint even if its ultimately bad for you.