 |
| Nina Turner delivers her concession speech (Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images via Politico) |
The outcome of this election, for me, doesn't change anything—because I had already concluded some time ago that it's a fool's errand for anyone on the left to try to transform the Democratic Party from within. The 2020 primary made this clear to me once and for all: the Establishment is simply too powerful. It sets the parameters of the contest for power, it writes the rules of the game, and it is remarkably effective at winning that game. There is no "pushing the Democrats to the left" in any meaningful sense.
That doesn't mean that working within the Democratic Party will accomplish nothing, of course. No—in order to keep progressives and leftists from abandoning the party altogether, the Democratic establishment is certainly willing to throw a bone or two their way, every now and again. And occasionally, a progressive challenger can unseat an establishment-backed figure—even an incumbent (just ask Joe Crowley or Eliot Engel). But we're talking marginal, around-the-edges stuff here. There are not going to be enough AOC-defeats-Crowley type primaries to really transform the party, and the self-described socialist candidates that have made it all the way to Congress have so far been of limited utility, anyway. Which is not entirely their fault: they are working within a party and a political system designed to pull them to the right.
Joe Biden's presidency has so far been illustrative of how little the Democratic Party has really changed, despite flimsy claims to the contrary. I've already addressed his willingness to abandon progressive goals like a $15-an-hour minimum wage seemingly at the drop of a hat, and recent events
only show how unwilling he is to deviate too far from the "center." In contrast to even Obama's attempts to thaw the US relationship with Cuba, the Biden administration recently slapped the country with new sanctions. Meanwhile on the domestic front, Biden allowed the eviction moratorium to lapse, claiming he had no legal authority to extend it—only to decide, days after the original ban had expired, that he did have the authority to put in place a more limited moratorium (so why not do that in the first place, one wonders)? Even this debacle overshadows the reality that the only thing "preventing" Biden from extending the original moratorium was Brett Kavanaugh's indication—not ruling—that he thought doing so exceeded the CDC's statutory authority.
The Biden administration has, of course, done some good and important things on the economic front. But this is in the face of a major global crisis the likes of which hasn't been seen for at least the better part of a century. While it is certainly desirable to get the American economy back up and running, Biden's attempts to do so—and to provide temporary relief in the meantime—in no way amount to some kind of new New Deal, let alone anything more radical. He has taken actions that are absolutely pragmatic for someone who supports American capitalism as it has existed in the neoliberal era, and wants to return that system to full function—nothing more, nothing less.
We should also acknowledge that the power-holders within the Democratic Party are not the only thing preventing a left-wing takeover; so are its voters. Not surprisingly, the type of people who show up to vote in Democratic primaries tend to have reasonably positive views of figures like Joe Biden, Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Hillary Clinton—all of whom are figures that any authentic left-wing movement must view as its opponents. On the other hand, the Democratic primary electorate is likely to exclude the type of people that the left should be trying the most hard to reach out to—those who correctly view both parties (and politics in general) as essentially corporate-run and/or alienated from regular people, and who are therefore disinclined to vote in either party's primaries, if at all. It's true that Democratic primary voters do often support leftish policies like Medicare for All and a higher minimum wage, but it should be clear by now that this doesn't translate into support for candidates who will actually deliver those policies. As long as the left associates itself with the Democratic Party, it only makes it easier for the Democrats to appeal to these left-leaning voters; after all, if two candidates are running in the same party's primary, it's hardly insane to assume they have similar policies and priorities.
We should also take some lessons from history. For all the talk about Franklin D. Roosevelt and how he was successfully pushed leftward (which supposedly shows that Democrats, despite their flaws, are worth supporting), there's little acknowledgment of the factors that actually achieved this feat. Of major significance was the surging support for socialism and communism, both of which were represented by small but significant third parties. Also important was populist Louisiana senator Huey Long who—while a Democrat—had no particular party loyalty, and was widely believed to be gearing up for a third-party presidential run of his own before he was assassinated in 1935. While the US remained a thoroughly two-party system at the national level, these rumblings from the left were ominous enough that Roosevelt "lifted ideas from the likes of [six-time Socialist Party presidential candidate] Norman Thomas," in the words of historian Paul Berman. Even if the goal is simply to push the Democrats to the left (which, given the crises we face going forward, may not be enough anyway), it makes no sense to do this by wedding oneself to the Democratic Party before that goal has been achieved.
This is not to say that leftists shouldn't run in Democratic primaries, or exercise whatever power they have within the Democratic Party to push it (ever so slightly) leftward. But if these are the only, or primary, tactics in the left's arsenal, it can't hope to achieve anything but very marginal successes. In my opinion, the only hope at this point involves organizing outside of the Democratic Party. This does not mean forming a third party, at least to start with (and it certainly doesn't mean joining one of the already existing, often laughable, third parties). Again, the people that need to be reached the most are the ones who are disenchanted with politics.
The best way to activate them, in my estimation, is to reach out to them not about grand political projects but about the issues that impact their day to day life. What first united workers in the labor movement was not necessarily some ambition to build a new society in the future, but the possibility that they could improve their lives in the here and now by getting higher pay, shorter hours and better working conditions. Given how atomized society has become and how much shit everyone has to deal with day to day, it's hard to ask the average person to make sacrifices in hopes that we will one day achieve a society that seems impossible right now. But if they believe that by making some small sacrifice now they'll soon be coming out on top, that's a direct appeal to their self-interest. We're talking things like labor unions, tenants' unions and other associations that focus directly on the concrete issues that matter most to regular, relatively apolitical people, and offer hope of meaningful improvement in the short- to medium-term. Once groups of this sort have flourished and achieved some successes to energize their members, they could then set their sights higher. Such groups could also serve to educate their members and convince them that it's worth it to become part of a broader left-wing political project.
I am not delusional enough to think that this process would be as quick and easy as I'm making it sound. At this point, the odds of bringing about some kind of truly just and equitable society—or even avoiding catastrophe—do not appear to be in our favor. If I had to make a prediction about how things would turn out, it would not be a favorable one. But this does not mean the left should resign itself to a bleak future, or to simply rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic. There may be few paths, at this point, that lead to a truly brighter future; but even so, I believe all of them lie outside of the Democratic Party.
