Mediaboss Marketing

Every hero needs a villain. A compelling story requires conflict, friction, an obstacle to be overcome.

Political campaigns are no different. Candidates, of course, often claim that they want to run "a purely positive campaign," but this rarely materializes. There are political advertisements that surprise and delight without a shred of the toxicity to which we have become accustomed. And even some ads that are labeled "negative" are useful and informative in their own way; candidates have different points of view, and those viewpoints are germane to an election. But for the most part, candidates have political consultants in their ears whispering pleas to come to the Dark Side. "Go negative. It works."

And negative has worked. Our current president is in the White House in large part because enough voters simply could not stomach the idea of Hillary Clinton as president that they were willing to roll the dice in a dangerous gamble. (According to the exit polls, among those voters with an unfavorable view of both candidates, Trump won handily.) Republicans took back the house in 2010 and held it in 2014 in part by running against a list of things: Obama, Obamacare, Nancy Pelosi (always Pelosi). In 2016, down-ballot Republicans also had the ability to run as a check-and-balance on the expected Clinton White House 2.0. We will repeal this, we will stop that, we will send a message to Washington, we will hold Hillary Clinton accountable.

Well Republicans are Washington now. Obama is golfing or windsurfing and working on a book. Nancy Pelosi is still in Congress, but hasn't been Speaker for almost seven years. Hillary Clinton pops up in the news every so often, giving interviews about her loss that most recently include trashing her own DNC.

But not a single one of these things is preventing Republicans from doing what they promised they'd do.

With a host of opponents defeated up and down the ballot, and now having assumed control of the levers of power, Republicans could be producing policy wins and delivering on promises. One year ago, House Speaker Paul Ryan rolled out his "Better Way" agenda, pledging to promote a positive vision of how conservatives could help the middle class and promote economic mobility. And though many of us in the "reform conservative" realm have always looked at the Trump presidency with a mix of horror and disappointment, there were moments when it seemed possible that Trumpland could have some "reform conservative" sympathies given the occasional rhetorical focus on jobs, economic mobility, and the working class.

And yethere we are, with months having gone by, and so little to show for it.

The health care "repeal and replace" effort sits in the Senate. Tax reform exists, sort of, as an outline miles away from being actual passed legislation.

This week was supposed to be Infrastructure Week a week when Republicans pushed for upgrades to American roads, bridges, and waterways - and yet President Trump kicked off Monday morning with a series of tweets going after his own Justice Department and further undermining his own legal case for his "travel ban". Members of Congress are being tied up constantly on Trump, Trump, Trump his tweets, the investigations, the chaos swirling around the whole administration.

We'll always have Gorsuch, I guess.

In practice, the Republicans' real enemy is themselves. There is no one else to blame. But how can one campaign for office in today's America without someone to blame? And so without a Hillary Clinton or a Barack Obama to set up as The Villain We Can Only Overcome With Your Vote, Republicans have apparently found a new target: the media. Each June, Gallup asks Americans how much trust they have in institutions, and as of last check, trust in television and print news was appallingly low. (Not as low as Congress, however.)

Of course, while asking for A Vote Against Nancy Pelosi is, arguably, an actual policy position deep down on the inside, A Vote Against The Media iswhat exactly? Voting as venting? But Republicans feel like they've never gone wrong bashing the media and don't feel like this time will be any different. They very well might be right.

The idea that someone, somewhere will campaign in a positive, uplifting way, on an agenda that can inspire Americans? I'm sadly done holding my breath. But if elections are supposed to be about sending people to Washington to govern in a certain way, how tragic that a moment of unprecedented Republican power, with so many foes vanquished, we find so little to say about governing at all. That Republican voters would be so disappointed with their own party's achievements as to need a new Villain of the Week to motivate them a villain with no control over any levers of government at all - is just tragic.

Or rather, today's politics not a story of heroes and villains at all, but like so many of the modern prestige television dramas, we simply have an anti-hero, whose worst enemy is only himself.

Kristen Soltis Anderson is a columnist for The Washington Examiner and author of "The Selfie Vote."

Originally posted here:
Republicans seek a new villain, while their true foe is in the mirror - Washington Examiner

California Assemblyman Jimmy Gomez triumphed Tuesday in a runoff for the states Los Angeles-centered 34th Congressional District, a victory for Latino and progressive groups that overcamelow turnout and election fatigue. The seat long held by Xavier Becerra, now Californias attorney general, will be held by an aspiring member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus and supporter of single-payer health care.

Gomez, 42, defeated former L.A. planning commissioner Robert Lee Ahn, 41, who invested his own money in the race and aggressively turned out Korean-American voters. That strategy powered him through the April 4 primary for the safe blue seat, and worried Gomez supporters from the top of the California Democratic Party to groups like the Latino Victory Fund. In the primary, 64.4 percent of the vote had gone to Latino Democrats; a week before the June 6 election, ballot returns from Korean-Americans were outpacing ballot returns from Latinos.

At the same time, Ahn was attempting to shift the focus of the race from progressive credential he was formerly a Republican, while Gomez was endorsed by a Bernie Sanders-founded group to outsider status. In Ahns mailers and debate answers, Gomez, a former congressional staffer before he joined the Assembly, was a professional politician whose pile of endorsements made him suspect.

Latino Victory Fund president Cristobal J. Alex said his group put together a direct mail and voter contact campaign that moved ballots, targeting Latino voters with a series of pro-Gomez arguments.

We pushed the message that Jimmy would not only be a champion for voters, hed be a tip of the spear in the fight against Donald Trump, said Alex. Its a good example of what we need to do around the country.

Gomez won the early and mail-in vote, nearly 19,000 ballots, by just 156 votes. When election day ballots came in, he ran far ahead of Ahn, who conceded before 11 p.m. local time. But therace and results offered warnings for Democrats whove grown increasingly ambitious about taking control of the House in 2018.

Ahn was able to use his lack of party support as an asset at a sensitive time, with new California Democratic Party chairman Eric Bauman fending off attacks from a Sanders supporter who claimed that he stole his election. (Most of the dispute rests with proxy delegates, who Bauman did a better job of wrangling.) Gomez, who had backed Hillary Clinton for president, was supported somewhat reluctantly by the Sanders-founded Our Revolution after Sanders campaign veterans flamed out in the primary.

And the puny turnout less than the total vote for Democrat Jon Ossoff in the first round of his April primary for Georgias 6th District pointed to the difficulty Democrats often face in getting Latino voters to the polls for nonpresidential elections. In 2018, the party hopes to win six California seats that broke for Hillary Clinton over Donald Trump, amid worries that the voters activated last year may sit out the midterm elections.

Nonetheless, Gomezs victory will add to the lefts numbers in the House, with the new congressman expected to join the House Progressive Caucus. There was more mixed news for progressives in New Jersey, where Goldman Sachs banker-turned-philanthropist Phil Murphy easily won the Democratic nomination for governor. Murphy, seeking his first elected office at age 59, put away two rivals who attempted to frame the primary as a contest between a wealthy political establishment figure and the rising progressive tide.

They lost but the reality was more complicated than the storyline. Murphy, whod backed Howard Deans 2004 presidential bid and went on to work for Barack Obama, established himself early as a progressive whod make corporations and millionaires pay their fair share and cut hedge funds out of the state pension system.

Like Gomez, he won the endorsements of progressive groups and labor unions and party machines. As Murphy built a lead in the polls, his chief rivalsJohn Wisniewski and Jim Johnson attempted tograb the mantle of Sanders; Wisniewski had chaired the Vermont senators campaign in the state. (Sanders lost the primary.) Wisniewski went so far as to criticize Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.), a Murphy backer still extremely popular with rank-and-file New Jersey Democrats, for voting against a Sanders-backed pharmaceutical bill.

But Sanders never intervened in the race. His son Levi made an eyebrow-raising campaign swing for Murphy; the senator focused on congressional races in Kansas and Montana, where Democrats gained steam but lost.

There was better news for Sanders, and Democrats, in less-watched elections for local Mississippi and Connecticut offices. In Mississippi, where Sanders led a rally of labor unions this spring, left-wing candidate Chokwe Lumumba won the mayoralty of Jackson, and a Sanders supporter won a city council seat in suburban Meridian. And in Connecticut, Democrats won control of the Board of Selectmen in wealthy Fairfield, the sort of place where the party sees a chance to capitalize on Trumps unpopularity to win new majorities.

Follow this link:
Latino Democrat wins open House seat in California, as progressives make gains - Washington Post

A plan to draft Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., to lead a third party has been launched by progressives who are frustrated with the Democrats, the Washington Examiner reported.

Ahead of what is being called the "People's Summit" in Chicago this weekend, the progressives say Sanders is the choice for a new political movement. Sanders is scheduled to speak at the summit, the website reported.

"The majority of Americans are progressive and want a major new political party," said a report by progressives in advance of the meeting.

The 15-page report, called "From Resistance to Revolution," has a "Draft Bernie for aPeople's Party" logo at the top.

"Despite Bernie Sanders' monumental efforts to reform the Democratic Party, it remains firmly in neoliberal control," the report said.

"The Democratic Party has made it clear that it will not be the vehicle for the political revolution."

Draft Bernie founder and director Nick Brana, the former national political outreach coordinator for Sanders' 2016 presidential bid, added: "The facts and figures in the briefing show that a new party is the only way to defeat (President Donald) Trump and the Republican agenda.

"This is the case that has convinced Sanders surrogates and working people across the country to join the movement to Draft Bernie."

Organizers say the summit will bring together grassroots activists and leaders of key progressive organizations to chart strategies and build unity in calling for promoting a progressive vision that moves beyond resistance and protests."

2017 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

More:
Progressives Trying to Draft Bernie Sanders to Lead New Party - Newsmax

NEW BRUNSWICK, NJ Three aspiring state politicians hope their progressive bent will help them lock the Democratic nominations for state Senate and Assembly today, June 6, in the primary elections.

New Jerseys 40-member Senate and 80-member General Assembly combine to make up the state Legislature. Its members work to enact laws, serving all Garden State residents and constituents in their individual districts.

The 17th legislative district is comprised of portions of Middlesex and Somerset counties. The area covers New Brunswick, Piscataway, North Brunswick, Milltown and Franklin.

Sign Up for E-News

William Irwin aims to become the Democratic candidate for state senator in the 17th legislative district. His running mates, Heather Fenyk and Ralph Johnson, hope to represent the districts blue team for two Assembly seats in the general election.

The challengers are running on behalf of the Central Jersey Progressive Democrats, a faction founded last year on the ideals and policy goals of U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders.

Theyre facing incumbents from the Middlesex County Democratic Organization and the Somerset County Regular Democratic Organization.

Todays winning candidates will square off against Republican opponents in the fall.

Primary elections offer partisans the chance to choose their candidates in the November general election. Registered Democrats may vote in their partys primaries, and Republicans may do the same for their party.

Unaffiliated voters may ask for a ballot from either party at their polling stations. By doing so, however, voters become registered with the party in whose primary they voted.

Polls are open until 8 p.m. For information on where to vote, click here.

TAPinto New Brunswick sent questions to each Senate and Assembly candidate from the 17th legislative district. Below are answers from the three Central Jersey Progressive Democrats. Their responses may have been edited for grammar, style or brevity.

William Irwin, Piscataway resident running for state Senate

Describe your background and why you are qualified for the office.

I am honored to be leading a slate of candidates to take back our party and our government.

A former resident of New Brunswick and Franklin, Ive been a homeowner in Piscataway for 19 years with my wife and sons. A volunteer Little League manager, I have served as president of Piscataways Board of Education since 2014, when I was first elected. I ran in response to growing class sizes in our schools. As a former teacher (masters and bachelors degrees, both from Rutgers University), I thought I could help be part of the solution. I am proud of our boards work, including adopting the states first policy to protect immigrants in our school community, to defend the rights of our transgender students, to ensure a strong food justice policy and securing academic excellence and national recognition for our work. I have worked to ensure that our students and staff have an exceptional learning environment by reducing standardized testing in our schools.

I am a Progressive Democrat who deeply believes in an agenda for social, political and economic justice for all. I will bring these values and my experience of grassroots advocacy and policy change to the Legislature.

What do you consider the most pressing issue facing the state, and how would you address it?

Our slate of candidates believes resistance to the Trump administration and the fight to secure economic, political and social justice are the most pressing issues facing our residents.

On Nov. 8, I felt despair like so many, but on Nov. 9, I got to work. I was heartened by U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders call to begin the process of rebuilding our party. I looked to the Democratic leaders we have representing us in Piscataway and at the state level, and only heard silence from them. I did not see champions of working people. Instead, I saw leaders who are collaborating with Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials to implement Trump's immoral and illegal immigration plans. I saw elected officials withholding support for a $15-per-hour minimum wage, and doing little to stop the Williams Transco pipeline from coming into our community. Our Democrats helped Chris Christie cut the estate tax for 3,500 wealthy families by raising the gas tax on everyone else. I asked myself, Whose side are they really on? They certainly dont seem to be on the same side as the people I know in my community.

Unlike my opponents, I will actually stand up to Trump and represent my constituents.

If you are elected, what would you do to specifically help the constituents of the 17th legislative district?

I believe deeply in the policy objective outlined by Sen. Sanders and am glad our slate has adopted them as our own.

We are working to advance an agenda for social, political and economic justice for Middlesex County residents. I believe in raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour, in ensuring equal pay for equal work and investing in community facilities that benefit us all.

Our slate is opposed tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires that are paid for by increasing the tax burden on the working and middle class. Last years Transportation Trust Fund deal is one example of this; our Democratic leaders supported a regressive tax on gas, which everyone pays, but cut the estate tax for 3,500 wealthy families. Thats wrong for residents of LD-17, who often have long commutes, and limited public transportation choices.

I will work to stop the Williams Transco pipeline and end collaboration with Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials. I will be a member of the NJ Resistance Caucus in the Legislature, and stand up for working families. Our entire platform is available on our website at http://www.centraljerseyprogressivedemocrats.org.

Heather Fenyk, New Brunswick resident running for state Assembly

Describe your background and why you are qualified for the office.

I am a nonprofit director, working mother, small business owner and community organizer who has lived in New Brunswick with her family for almost two decades.

I have a proven track record of running successful social services and environmental organizing, including as a founding member of both the New Brunswick Community Food Alliance and New Brunswick Green Team, and as founder of New Jerseys newest watershed association, the Lower Raritan Watershed Partnership. I have never run for political office before, but I have a strong understanding of policy and of how government can work to help solve our common concerns.

In the state Assembly, I will fight to let residents have a voice in how we build our communities in deep and meaningful ways that include: fair and welcoming immigration status, school funding reform, environmental restoration, business incubation and creative economies. I am encouraged by the enthusiastic grassroots effort we have organized in a very short time, making clear that the Central Jersey Progressive Democrats platform speaks to the core values of our communities. We are proving that the best way to win is to talk about our core values, and to talk about restoring democracy to local decision-making.

What do you consider the most pressing issue facing the state, and how would you address it?

I am very concerned about restoring American democracy, which requires a shift from business as usual politics to direct and active engagement by the Democratic Partys progressive base.

I see the opportunities that have made prior generations of residents proud to call New Jersey home--great public schools, good local jobs and neighborhoods with a sense of place--slipping away from too many people. I am running, as part of an amazing slate of candidates, because I see career politicians working on behalf of land developers and entities that have no sense of the true character of the towns we call home.

If you are elected, what would you do to specifically help the constituents of the 17th legislative district?

I believe our leaders must resist the Trump Agenda, including opposing his immoral and illegal executive orders.

Like my running mates, I was disappointed last fall year when our Democratic representatives worked with Governor Christie to shift the tax burden of paying for roads and bridges from the top 3,500 wealthiest New Jersey families and onto to the middle and working classes by raising the gas tax on the rest of us.

I oppose the creation of the proposed Williams Transco Gas Pipeline, which is slated to bring unneeded fracked natural gas from Pennsylvania underneath large sections of Central Jersey, under Raritan Bay and utilize a compressor station that would have to be built on the South Brunswick/Franklin border. This pipeline serves no public interest and will needlessly put people in danger while undermining efforts to reverse global warming and wean our country from fossil fuels.

I believe that New Jersey should be aggressively pursuing a clean and renewable energy future, not capitulating to the fossil fuel. I support raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour to make sure all our residents and communities thrive.

Ralph Johnson, Piscataway resident running for state Assembly

Describe your background and why you are qualified for the office.

I am a Progressive Democrat who believes in social, economic and political justice and answering the call to take back the Democratic Party.

Since 2014, I have served on the Piscataway Board of Education, the only three time Magna award recipient in America by the National School Board Association. I am a current Lieutenant and a 20-year veteran of law enforcement, a two-term Piscataway school board member, a Pop Warner Football and Little League Baseball coach, the chair of the boards School Culture and Climate Committee, delegate to the Educational Services Commission of New Jersey and former educator.

Unlike my opponents, who are both white men, I can represent my communitys diversity and increase the representation of African-Americans in New Jerseys General Assembly. I have lived with my wife and four children in Piscataway since 2001.

I have a masters degree in education from Saint Peters College, a bachelors degree in political science from West Virginia University and a certification of administration and supervision in education and a standard teaching license. I am an active member of the Mens of Christ Fellowship Ministry, and worshiping and serving the Lord with Zion Hill Baptist Church of Piscataway.

What do you consider the most pressing issue facing the state, and how would you address it?

After the election, I was disappointed and worried about what a Trump presidency would mean for my community, my friends and my family.

Sen. Sanders call to run progressives for local office really resonated with me; I know that we need to stand up for ourselves, and to be the change we wish to see. I believe it is time for the American people to make a fundamental decision to get actively involved in the Democratic process or be a bystander.

Our current representatives are corporate Democrats and do not fight for working families. They voted for the Transportation Trust Fund, which raised the gas tax--one of the most regressive taxes--for millions of working people and seniors in the state, but cut the estate tax for 3,500 wealthy families. They have done nothing to protect our immigrant neighbors, and they are vigorously not opposing the Williams Transco pipeline.

The people of the 17th legislative district deserve better, and I look forward to the opportunity to represent our shared beliefs in the state Assembly. I encourage people to review our position statements at http://www.centraljerseyprogressivedemocrats.org.

If you are elected, what would you do to specifically help the constituents of the 17th legislative district?

As a member of the state Assembly, I would stand up to Donald Trump at every opportunity and stand up for working families, not millionaires and billionaires.

Our current representatives are not part of the NJ Resistance, which is fighting the Trump agenda by passing progressive state legislation. I wont sit on the sidelines; I will be in the fight for $15 and work to make sure that New Jersey is a safe and welcoming community for all of our neighbors. Ill use my service to ensure that everyone benefits, not just the wealthy few.

I will fight for the school funding formula to be fully funded, so residents of LD-17 get the state support they pay for and deserve. I believe we should reduce our reliance on fossil fuels, and oppose the Williams Transco pipeline and gas compressor station slated to be built in Franklin.

Voters in our communities want leaders who will listen and respond to them. Voters I have talked to say that our current representatives do not respond to their calls or concerns. Our communities are tired of being taken for granted. I will listen and I will advocate for the needs of all of my constituents.

Continued here:
Sanders-Inspired Progressives Aim to Secure Democratic Nod in the 17th District - TAPinto.net

In the 1970s, the progressives, in exercising their political franchise organized and operated movements that were named and styled progressive movements: Movement for Justice in Africa (MOJA) and Progressive Alliance of Liberia (PAL), prior to the coupdtat in early 1980.

It was amid speculations that this was due to the manner in which the True Wing Party (TWP) Governments before these events conducted the state of affairs. As a consequence, some senior members of these movements as well as cabinet ministers were annoyed and had showed readiness to resign. In a quick move to avoid public disgrace and embarrassment, government licensed the movements.

Sad to say, the bulk of the progressive politicians in these movements regardless of whatever social class or level, do not emanate from the cream of those who have attained high intellectual sophistication through arduous training and exposure to the circles and corridors of higher learning from the likes of Americas civil right leader Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and former South African President Nelson Mandala who emancipated their people from unnecessary socio-economic deprivation.

Consequently, much of what is being done today in Liberia is by guesswork and imitation often spiced with a substantial amount of sheer ignorance of the plight of the Liberian people, especially the rural communities. Very often, one hears them quote statements totally out of context, or use concepts that are obsolete and inapplicable to Liberia political, leadership, social, economic and religious problems. One might say, oh! Why dont the enlightened advice to mitigate such horrible political and national disasters?

When opportunists who posed as progressives and ride the saddle of political power, very rare do they harken unto the advice of reason. Entrusting state power to the custody of the ignorance and self-styled progressive politicians seems to be a common trend though almost always with disastrous results in our country. Perhaps, it is high time caution was given with regard to the loose manner in which certain concepts or practices are adopted or used.

Of late, concepts like sovereignty have become victims of the loose application within and without Parliament or the National Legislature and at times to the detriment of diplomatic relations and international partnership.

The political and state actors in public affairs today were our common yearning for socio-economic and political freedom, peace and a better life for all. The socio-economic concern is about a past and current governments oppression and despair and a future of hope and democracy. There are those who would like us to believe that the past doesnt exist: that decades of dictatorship rule have suddenly disappeared. But the economic and social devastation of dictatorship remains.

Therefore, our country is in a mess. Change in the pending October 10, 2017 Presidential and legislative elections is a must. To eradicate the serious problems caused by the economic and social devastation of dictatorship, mismanagement and corruption, Liberia needs a government with the political will to meet the challenge and battle with current opportunism; a government that understands the needs of the future because it understands the neglect and division of the past.

We need a government that puts people and country first. The practice created by current political and state actors to buy and support opposition members with large amounts of public money is tantamount to corruption. The practice is bad and clampdown our young democracy.

Progressives, Really?

Indeed the world over, formation of progressive movements of national concerns is not a strange thing. However, there are conditions that necessitate such arrangements.

What is fundamental in such situations is the preservation of the integrity of the state and nation in the face of either internal rift or external aggression.

Briefly, progressive movements of national concerns are formulated with well-defined and specified political ideology and are realistically inclusive and therefore consistent as well as representative. It accommodates nearly every strata of society. Every sector with a major say or representation, political or civil, is represented in such arrangement.

Further, progressive movements are by nature temporal and transient for it is meant to deal with an emergency.

It is specifically tailored to respond with speed, united focus and energy to a specific situation of emergency such as uncontrollable prices of basic commodities and unprecedented exchange rates in the face of rampant corruption of state resources.

With this understanding, do the prevalent social and economic conditions in Liberia call for progressives in public affairs to act now? Obviously yes! There are serious socio-economic treats and challenges to the integrity of the state of Liberia from within with respect to the vampire-rampant corruption-and fragile national reconciliation.

Even, if there were not such profound treats and plights of socio-economic well-being of bulk of the Liberian people, what the self-styled progressives in public affairs are doing in current government is far from qualifying them as progressives in the true sense and meaning of the word. They have got it extremely and dangerously wrong!

Liberia progressives prior to 1980 are far from mirroring the state and nation of Liberia. Where the Liberian People Party (LPP) and its progressives? Where also is United People Party (UPP) and its surviving progressives? What about the representatives of other political parties and civil society? For the sake of prosperity and precedent there is a need to remind our political and state actors who are proliferating around here as progressives on some historical prospective and correct them straight away.

The problem with which the progressives failed to contend is that of the intra and inter relationship between and among their national leaderships. As things stand at the moment the relationship is unhealthy. This unhealthiness is indicated by such symptoms of intolerance on the part of the progressives towards one another, a tendency towards strong-man leadership, indulgence in smear campaigns and political instability within their camps.

It can be argued, on the one hand, that the intolerance towards one another is bred by the destructive criticism of their leaderships and that the task which these progressives face call for strong-man/woman government.

On the other hand, it can equally be contended that the attitude of their followers on the basis of regional alliance is inevitable in view of the intolerance of their leaderships, and that internally political conflicts result from the conviction that the speeches of their national leaderships would not influence them to change some of their policies. There are some elements of truth in both arguments but the remainder of the truth lies somewhere.

The main explanation of friction hinges on the sharing of gratitude and prestige. Before the coupdtat, True Wing Party rulers and their cohorts occupied the top most rungs of the social ladder. With the staging of the coup dtat, however, they stepped down and leaders of progressive movements who have triumphed at the political stage stepped up to fill the vacant rungs, thereby becoming the recipients of gratitude and admiration from their fellow-countrymen for having liberated their country.

Some leaders of the progressives and civil society, who might have fought for justice just as valiantly as anyone else, found themselves as the recipients of practically nothing. Herein lies the rub.

It is only human for these people to feel that they have been given a raw deal. Once they begin to feel that way, they are often certain to despise and to denounce their opponents as selfish, ambitious, and vain. Their opponents will regard this as mischievous detraction and may resort by calling them jealous, visionless, little men with small minds.

And so the stage was set for full-scale mud-slinging which culminated in the progressives lost of focus, thereby resulting into division and failure. This intolerance only exacerbated feelings, created more tension and led to political isolation of their colleagues before, during and after the civil conflict. Yet the economic and social problems which confront Liberia require, for their solution, that there should be unity, reconciliation and cooperation between political and state actors in public affairs and their colleagues.

Henceforth, what had been formulated and paraded in the 1970s and early 1980s were not progressive movements to preserve the integrity of the state and nation of Liberia but political opportunism for inclusion in government. Do you remember what happened during and following the All Liberian National Conference in 1997, held at the Unity Conference Center in Monrovia?

Not long after the conference, major political actors and national policy-decision makers of the main progressive political parties, notably LPP and UPP went ahead to form a coalition with the Liberia Action Party (LAP), thereby fuelling internal conflicts that led to the controversial division of the two main progressive political parties, respectively between different factions.

One might reasonably believe, if we are to go by the events, that the 1970s and 1980s progressives on one hand, and post-war politicians on the other hand, in the current government have one thing in common, their single-mindedness and passion, coupled with unrelated loathe against their colleagues and the common people, on one side, and serious commitment to unreservedly loot the nation before vacating their seats.

In fact, it is the progressives in the current government who have been ardently strategizing and fighting for disunity by practicing politics of exclusion meant to victimize their colleagues through the imaginary regional alliance. This concept and passion have been there since the Interim Government of National Unity (IGNU) in 1990.

As the current government near exit, the progressives and state actors in public affairs are more than ever bent on ensuring that their cohorts, especially those who fiercely campaigned for their second-term bid for their present seats are left in warmth through the state confers. That is why bogus political alliances have been created across the current political spectrum to accommodate even the most mediocre in their newly political establishments.

While public affairs are below standards, the economy is in doldrums, poverty has become standard and the government offices at the Capitol Hill and around Monrovia from where progressive political and state actors in public affairs are operating, indeed the very seat of government, are so dusty and smoky that one never knows the last time these offices were graced with a face lift (most probably when President William R. Tolbert, Jr. was still in charge), and the surrounding are overgrown with bushes while the laborers are busy playing face book as early as 9:00am, etc. What a joke! This is really a joke, albeit a bad one.

For political and state actors in public affairs currently, whose stature of sanity and moral integrity is now very questionable, everybody now knows that they are part of this last hour bonanza for a pension scheme the government has all long determined to get after its second term.

To conclude, let me remind all Liberians that our country is at war with poverty, ignorance, malnutrition and disease. Whether they win the war will depend to a very large extent, on the cooperation and the enthusiasm which the political and state actors in public affairs can generate among their fellow countrymen. Party wrangles resulting in mutual hatred, disunity, confusion and despondency is not an asset in such a war or any other war for that matter.

Working together would have the effect of building up mutual trust between the leaders of various political parties. Once distrust has been removed, the winning and losing parties can revert to their respective functions of proposing and opposing and there would be a reasonable chance that views of the opposition will not only be listened to sympathetically but also acted upon where necessary.

Undoubtedly, it is not pleasant to work side by side with your rival. Leaders of the main political parties in Great Britain also felt that way at the beginning of the Second World War. But they saw that the situation demanded unity and cooperation so they curbed their rivalry and teamed up together to save their country.

In Liberia the political and state actors in public affairs face the challenge of saving our country from stagnation. Have they anything to lose by teaming up together?

Tom Nimely Chie, Contributing Writer

Read more:
Liberia's Political and State Actors (1980-2017): Progressives Really or National Opportunists? - Front Page Africa