2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumThe Guardian: "Only Sanders can break the power of capitalism in the US
Last edited Mon Apr 18, 2016, 09:24 PM - Edit history (1)
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/apr/18/bernie-sanders-break-power-capitalism-us-democratic-presidential-race-hillary-clintonUS politics
Opinion
Only Bernie Sanders can break the power of capitalism in the US
Paul Mason
Monday 18 April 2016 10.01 EDT
Defining the US Democratic presidential race as a choice between economic and social justice was a masterstroke from Hillary Clinton. But Sanders has something that she lacks: the ability to build a movement
....
So for all the global medias obsession with Trump, the real question in this election is: what kind of progressive politics will govern America one that leaves the power of money intact or, as in the great reforming eras of US politics, fundamentally re-orders capitalism?
...
Americas progressive majority needs not just a Democratic president. It needs a presidential candidate who can deliver, either this year or by mid-term, a majority in both houses of Congress and who is determined to engineer a liberal supreme court for a generation. Whether on the issues of class or identity, that is the war that needs to be fought. And only Bernie Sanders can win it.
Why? In the first place, because the majority needed in Congress can only be delivered by high Democratic turnout. The system is so gerrymandered at local level that the Democrats need an 8-10% lead to win a slim majority in the House. Sanders, unlike Clinton, has a clear lead over any Republican candidate in polls of all voters. Indeed, 33% of Sanders supporters in one March poll said they could not bring themselves to vote for Clinton if selected.
....
But Sanders has something that progressive America needs: the ability to build and sustain a movement. Since 2011, the huge weakness of the progressive activist generation has been their tendency to flip from heroic actions Wisconsin, Occupy, the Black Lives Matter movement to footsolider status in short-lived presidential campaigns.
By contrast, the right has a grassroots movement that, aided by the dollars of the Koch brothers, will harass and sabotage the next Democratic president. It is this movement that has delivered the local counter-revolutions on abortion; that harries migrants; that passes byelaws disenfranchising black voters.
The progressive majority in America needs to become a counter-movement. It needs to occupy not just the occasional park, university or road junction. It needs to occupy the actual political space now squatted by the right: the town hall, the state Capitol, the courtroom, the education board, the voter registration system.
That movement would have to neutralise rightwing working-class opposition by appealing across the formal divide of politics to the desire among many on the right for economic justice. It can only do that by fighting the power and privilege of the very people pouring money into the Clinton campaign. Its hard to imagine Hillary Clinton doing that. A lifetime in elite politics and a bank account enlarged with speaker fees from Goldman Sachs stand in the way. With Bernie Sanders you dont need to imagine.
grasswire
(50,130 posts)per DU rules. Don't want to get your knuckles rapped.
Nice article, thanks.
pat_k
(9,313 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)between economic and social justice was a masterstroke from Hillary Clinton." First of all, H. Clinton couldn't have a "masterstroke" whatever the hell that is. But most people with a brain, including MLK Jr. recognize that if you don't have economic justice you can't have social justice. The Third Way wants to sell that you can. They want to loot all the wealth from the 99% while telling us that at least we have some social justice. Well, frack that schit. When we all become paupers, scraping for every meal, social justice will be the last thing on our minds. Clinton should ask those living in poverty if they want social justice or some food.
pat_k
(9,313 posts)Of course economic justice is a prerequisite for social justice. Nevertheless, it does seem that the notion that Bernie somehow doesn't grasp racial issues independent of economic issues has taken hold. I don't buy the notion, but it seems to be out there. I don't know whether or not this is what plays against him with African Americans or not. Perhaps the Clinton campaign has effectively represented her as a champion on racial issues -- somehow independent of economic issues. I find it a strange distinction, but it's a feasible theory, so I don't think the writer is too off base asserting it.
forjusticethunders
(1,151 posts)Whenever Sanders has tried to talk about "not economics" he's fallen flat on his ass and it sounds like he's not listening. Also it's all about connections; the whole "1960s civil rights" thing was honestly really blatant pandering and most black people saw right throw it, especially after the John Lewis brigading. Hillary, for better or for worse, has had made personal and political connections with the African American community and it has created a level of trust that Bernie hasn't done the work to get through.
zazen
(2,978 posts)Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)RiverLover
(7,830 posts)Our grassroots is real & its got legs. It will continue!
Thanks for posting.
Jitter65
(3,089 posts)NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)kentuck
(111,098 posts)Bernie can do very little without help from many other committed individuals.