Before I get to it, I want to thank Eli and Green Mass Group for the opportunity to contribute to this dialog on Which way Left? – something that should really be taking place face-to-face. After all, it’s not as if we are creatures from different planets. As my username suggests, I was once a member of the Green-Rainbow Party but am presently a Democrat. During the 2016 election I was impressed by Bernie Sanders and still am. But I also appreciate how carefully Greens think about issues and how often they are miles ahead of even progressive Democrats. But I’ve nevertheless decided to stick with this #DemEnter experiment – at least until the midterm elections.
There have been numerous, and well-documented, failures to reform the Democratic Party but in the 45 years I’ve been voting I can’t recall a moment in our history that has been so dangerous. Like it or not – and like them or not – Democrats are the only serious force standing between Republicans and their kleptocratic version of Gilead.
Eli’s comment on my previous post also deserves a reply. For many Greens Elizabeth Warren is the poster child for the failure of so-called progressive Democrats to be a real party of the people. To some extent I agree – though perhaps for different reasons. Eli’s example is the Dakota pipeline and Native American rights, which Warren has not particularly gone out of her way to defend. For the sake of argument I’ll concede his point immediately – although, to be fair, Warren had plenty of other things to do during post-election Senate confirmation hearings.
But then – to be absolutely fair – one also must ask why Green Party senators and congressmen from North Dakota, South Dakota, Iowa, and Illinois failed to intervene and defend environmental and indigenous interests. Not just craft progressive platform planks – but duke it out every day in Congress and face political realities. This is neither a rhetorical question nor an intended cheap shot. The question really boils down to this: how do progressives [of any sort] get elected, and what do they do in office once elected? A case in point is die Grünen, Germany’s Green Party. In coalitions with the SPD they have periodically represented austerity programs and militarism, and in recent years have been the eco-friendly European business party – but their platform is great.
Words are cheap and politics is complicated.
This was pretty clear at the Massachusetts Democratic Convention on June 3rd. Many of the progressive planks that Our Revolution Massachusetts (ORMA), PDA and Progressive Massachusetts called for were shockingly adopted with little objection and almost no discussion. There was an endless, and exhausting, four hour procession of machine Democrats proclaiming themselves the party of the resistance – Democrats who next week will be back to fundraising at $2500 a plate dinners. In fact, the speechifying went on so long that it was generally agreed that the purpose was to prevent discussion, promote an illusion of “unity” by masking disagreement, and to kill pesky, embarrassing non-platform resolutions. ORMA summarized their losses:
“Its push for new housing policies to end displacement was defeated by delegates who favor building more market-rate housing. ORMA’s proposals to make the party structure more democratic, by adding more state committee members who are elected by grassroots members and by reducing the number of signatures required to propose amendments to the charter, were also rejected. The convention chair ruled that ORMA-backed proposals on military and foreign policy, and on peace in the Middle East, were ruled out of order although they clearly had substantial support. The chair likewise ruled out of order a proposal that Democratic candidates must support the majority of the party platform or face loss of support by the party organization.”
This last one tells us something — that uplifting language in a platform is meaningless when there are no consequences for candidates who fail to uphold platform principles. Look at Ninth Congressional District Congressman Bill Keating – Iran hawk, cheerleader for Trump’s Tomahawk missile attack, and opponent of single-payer healthcare. Extreme disappointments like Keating were no-shows at the convention – my guess is because they would have reminded everyone of what the Massachusetts Democratic Party really is.
Likewise, the arbitrary elimination of foreign policy planks — even as the state party weighed in on Trump, climate change, veterans, and immigration — revealed once again the Democratic Party’s deathly fear of tackling militarism and the Israel-Palestine issue, and its fundamental lack of democracy. Only 80 of 413 party committee members are elected and the next charter convention is in 2019, after the midterms. These professional Democrats make the old Soviet Politburo look like a bunch of amateurs. In my heart of hearts I know that the party is more likely to be reformed by an earth-bound asteroid than entryism.
Jonathan Cohn of Progressive Massachusetts had a great piece in Commonwealth reminding readers that the Massachusetts Democratic Party has historically talked big and delivered little. And this was precisely the thesis that Thomas Frank elaborated in Listen, Liberal. But in “talking big” and delivering little, Democrats, Greens and Democratic Socialists are all tragically similar. The common thread is our self-delusion.
Democrats like to think they are more progressive than they really are. Progressive Democrats like to think they’re more influential than they are. Greens seem to think that correct positions alone can pave the road forward. Democratic Socialists think the conditions for socialism are ripe. Unfortunately, the only thing that’s ripe is our fevered imaginations. But, besides self-delusion, our biggest enemy is lack of democracy and the failure to build grass-roots parties. And I include my friends in the Green Party: you expend a lot of effort and money running presidential and gubernatorial candidates – but where is your congressman from North Dakota?
As for us – either the Democratic party will become little-d democratic or it will fail spectacularly. Reform is extremely unlikely – but wandering through this political desert is an attempt and a shared experience that Democrats will have to go through together. I think we’ll eventually see the formation of a third – or more accurately a replacement – for the Democratic party without so much of the baggage of its predecessor. But this is going to require progressives of every color – Green, Blue, and Red – to have been working together in coalitions and to have created a progressive ecosystem from which a new movement can emerge. And the moment that happens progressives are going to start learning the old lesson in a new context. Precisely how it’s going to happen none of us can imagine now.
Words are cheap and politics is complicated.
Comments are closed.