800 "Our Revolution" organisation promoted by Mr. Bernie Sanders will it serve as a PRESSURE GROUP?

Here is a link to click to go to rt.com/usa/357086 web page- bernie sanders announcing his non-profit organisation "Our Revolution". . Readers may recall that Mr. Bernie Sanders, the runners'-up Chief rival claimant to the Democratic Party candidature for American Presidential Election 2016, lost his campaign. His loss is quite understandable considering the American propensities to support individualism, and individual self-confidence of citizens, sometimes reaching to heights of arrogance, as Citizens of the Policeman of the World. According to NYTimes: "...Top officials at the Democratic National Committee criticized and mocked Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont during the primary campaign, even though the organization publicly insisted that it was neutral in the race, according to committee emails made public on Friday by WikiLeaks. ...". Whatever be the reason for loss of a historic opportunity for Mr. Sanders, as anticipated by us in our previous blogposts, he has started a new organisation named "Our Revolution".

Mr. Sanders' quote/action	ybrao-a-donkey's humble view
“It is nice to be home, as I have said a million times, real change doesn’t take place from the top down."	If Mr. Sanders believed what he said on the podium, he would not have contested for the Democratic Nomination to the Presidential job. He might have, in right earnest, initiated the change from the bottom. That means, he might have started the "Our Revolution" organisation first, and passed on the baton to his disciples who were to carry on the change to the next American Generation. In my mother tongue Telugu language, there is a proverb "andani drAksha panDlu pullana". Approx. English: In an Aesop's fable like Telugu folk story: A fox tried to catch hold of a bunch of grapes, but could not, as the bunch was at a height. After its attempts failed, the fox withdrew saying "Grapes which are beyond reach, tend to be sour". A true socialist cannot join and continue in a bourgeoisie party, hope for its top nomination. It is outright, a weird idea like a square peg in a round hole. Fail, then say we have to start from bottom. This seems to be inappropriate to my immature mind. Besides, if top is rotten, bottom may not be able to restore the top to health. Bottoms will have to dump the tops. It can happen even through change of hearts and ballets. But this change of hearts has to last longer. Else the changes brought out by Revolutions will be reduced to a heap of s***.
"...To help hundreds of thousands of people fighting at the grassroots level,the independent nonprofit organization Our Revolution is being formed."	The "Our Revolution" Organization floated by Mr. Sanders ought not to try to hijack the Democratic Party which has a bourgeoisie roots, philosophical base, and which never claimed to be socialist. Mr. Sanders has to launch it either as a new Political Party with Socialist Principles, having a clear-cut SOCIALIST tag in the name itself. There can't be a via media approach for True Socialism. It must straight promise EQUALISM, removal of private property, abolition of money and monetary economy, dumping Wall Street into the Atlantic Ocean, a Marriage-less society, a secular common civil code, introduction of physical labor in addition to mental labor for all physically-fit and mentally-fit persons capable of working. Equalism and Socialism ought not to tolerate LAZY CLASSES ROLLING ON COUCHES, on the pretext of accumulated past earnings, or practising some aristocratic businesses or elite professions. Tinkering with medicare, College fees etc. have already been ineffectively tried by bourgeoisie parties. There is no use of harping the same insipid and stale tunes. I cannot resist the idea of getting an impression that the "Our Revolution" promoted by Mr. Sanders may at the most serve as a pressure group on Ms. Hillary Clinton in the Democratic Party, or on Mr. Donald Trump, if he gets elected as President. The interviewer at RT.com Mr. Ed Schultz, who talked with Mr. Cohen (Communications Manager of Mr. Sanders) seems to be right in his futuristic comment: "what might come of the movement if 'Our Revolution' doesn't get off to a great start?". Of course, nobody can expect astounding success for the 'Our Revolution' in its very first year of existence. Normally revolutions tend to be bubbles and foams of exuberant or exorbitant effervescence lasting a few years, after which some unscrupulous fellow takes over organisations and runs them as despotic tyrannies, though 'labels' may continue. This is because members lack deep-rooted convictions in their philosophies, or because the successors lack the same commitment to philosophies which the founder-members had. Uplifting of founding members to numbness by forming "marga-darsak-mandal (Council for showing path)" is also possible. The name of the organisation ought to have been "Our Evolution" (or "Our Evolution into True Socialists") instead of "Our Revolution". Revolutions tend to be cyclic. Evolutions will be irreversible, and they will have only changeable futures and not hackneyed pasts, unless there are grave reasons warranting "retrogression" an inevitable imperative.

To continue. सशेष. ఇంకా ఉంది.