Why Demands to Endorse Hillary
Must Be Rejected
A growing chorus of voices is
declaring the Democratic Primary over, and calling on Sandernistas to dutifully
line up behind Hillary.
Unfortunately, the pundits are
right about the mathematics. Sanders would need more than 64% of remaining
delegates to take the lead. It would require a political bombshell to turn
things around, especially with so many closed primaries where independents are
shut out of this rigged process. And even with a majority, Bernie would still
face the undemocratic brick wall of the establishment’s hand-picked crew of
superdelegates.
But while the media
establishment may be right about the numbers, they’re dead wrong about Sanders
supporters flipping for Clinton. To throw our support behind Hillary’s
corporate campaign would be to sabotage our political revolution.
At the same time the Clintons
and Democratic establishment are cracking their whips for “party unity,” we’re
also hearing Bernie Sanders shifting his political messaging away from winning
and from political revolution. “[This] campaign,” Sanders said, “is going to
the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia with as many delegates as
possible to fight for a progressive party platform.” This statement is just one
of a number of recent comments showing a fundamental change in approach.
With all due respect to Bernie
and his campaign, I think to reduce our struggle to a question of party
platform and of pushing Hillary to the left would be a fundamental mistake. In
reality, the Democratic Party platform is next to meaningless. There are no
rules, or even a custom, of elected Democrats respecting the party platform
when it comes to real world votes. And Hillary Clinton herself is a thoroughly
pro-corporate politician who has the full support and backing of Wall Street
and the billionaire class.
To endorse Hillary, even with
a more progressive platform, would be the opposite of political revolution and
would abandon all the vital energy and momentum we have built over this
historic past year.
We simply can’t afford to make
this mistake. That’s why I have launched a petition calling on
Bernie Sanders to run all the way to November as an independent, and to use his
campaign as a launch pad for a new political party of the 99%.
If Bernie’s only concern is
that running independently could open the door to a President Trump, then why
could he not at least campaign in the 40+ states where it’s generally clear the
Democratic or Republican candidate will win? Even in this way, while not
putting his name on the ballot in the 5-10 closely contested “swing states,” he
could still run an historic campaign if linked to building a new party. It
could lay the foundation for an ongoing mass political movement to run hundreds
of left candidates for all levels of government, independent of corporate cash.
He wouldn’t need to win this election to effect a sustained leftward shift in
US politics.
But the threat of Donald
Trump’s racist, Islamophobic, misogynist, right-populist message is all too
real. For that reason also, Bernie should run as an independent rather than
allow Trump to have a monopoly over the anti-establishment vote. The failure of
the left to organize and stand up against the bailouts of Wall Street is what
opened the door for the Tea Party, which effectively tapped into that genuine
anger. Millions of independents and Republicans who would vote for Bernie, will
instead choose Trump’s right populism if their only alternative is Clinton’s
corporate politics. Even if Trump doesn’t win, whatever traction he gets will
feed into an ongoing base for right-wing ideas.
An Historic Moment
Bernie’s campaign has
transformed the political discussion in the U.S. It has put forward a
fundamentally different vision, basing itself on the needs of the 99%, instead
of the greed of billionaires, and on expanding social services, rather than
cutting them. His demands for Medicare for all, for free college education, for
serious campaign finance reform, and for a $15 minimum wage, are the real heart
of the campaign. They are what has galvanized these historic mass rallies and
unprecedented grassroots fundraising. They have emboldened a new generation of
young people looking for an alternative to the failure of corporate politics
and capitalism.
Leaving aside Hillary
Clinton’s recent maneuvering around the $15 minimum wage, it’s crystal clear
she does not support any of the core issues we have fought for. She will not
bite the corporate hands that feed her political career.
The Clintonian era which began
under Bill Clinton in the 1990s was marked by the Democratic Party’s open
advocacy and implementation of neoliberalism, as a continuation of the “trickle
down” ideas of Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush. The Clinton administration
passed devastating policies like NAFTA, with its brutal effects on workers and
the environment; the 1994 crime bill with its dramatic expansion of
incarceration; and the destruction of welfare with its inhuman effects on the
poor and particularly single mothers. Such laws were part of an overall agenda
of attacks on social services and on the interests of the working class and
people of color. Bill and Hillary Clinton were political partners in that
process, as they are political partners in Hillary’s election campaign today.
As a U.S. Senator, Clinton
voted for the Iraq War, the Patriot Act, the Patriot Act re-authorization, for
new “free trade” deals (including the 2008 Panama agreement which helped
perfect it as a tax haven), for bank
deregulation, the Wall Street bailouts (TARP), the 2006 border fence
legislation, and the list goes on. As Secretary of State she was perhaps the administration’s
most aggressive proponent for interventions in Libya and Syria that fueled the
humanitarian crisis in the region. She acted as a global spokesperson for
fracking, and in spite of considerable pressure from Sanders has not backed
down from this environmentally devastating practice.
Hillary won the admiration of
Bloomberg Businessweek for her corporate advocacy as Secretary, noting that
“Clinton turned the State Department into a machine for promoting U.S.
business,” and sought “to install herself as the government’s highest-ranking
business lobbyist.”
How can anyone seriously argue
that we can continue our political revolution by supporting one of the highest
profile opponents of that revolution, who has essentially vowed that the things
we’re fighting for will “never ever happen”? Hillary Clinton’s actual policies
will not be rooted in whatever platform is passed at the convention, but will
be based instead on her own neoliberal politics and on the influence of Wall
Street and the billionaire class that have funded her campaign. In fact, the
Clinton camp has already
responded to Sanders, rejecting attempts to push Hillary to the left.
Of course it’s not only about
Hillary. The Democratic Party leadership also doesn’t support any of these core
issues we’re fighting for. There is a reason only 1 Democratic U.S. Senator has
endorsed Bernie, while 40 have endorsed Hillary. Further, in the House of
Representatives, there are 188 Democrats, with the “left” organized into the
Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC), which has about 71 members. Even with
these 71 most progressive Democrats, only 4 have endorsed Sanders, less than 6%
of the CPC and just 2% of the House Democrats overall.
Bernie’s politics are
completely unacceptable to the Democratic Party leadership. That’s why I urged
Bernie to run as an independent before he launched his campaign.
The 1% politics of this party
are not new. The Democratic Party, originally the party of the slave owners,
has long been funded and controlled by big business. The gains that have been
won through it, such as the New Deal and Great Society programs, were won under
intense political pressure from working people. FDR originally ran for the
presidency on a message of fiscal austerity, and his tune only changed due to
the deepening of the economic crisis and the militant movement of labor
activists and socialists that erupted on his watch. In fact, he defended his
policies to business people as necessary concessions to mass movements, saying:
“I’m the best friend American capitalism ever had.”
Sanders has himself been
raising the following question in recent speeches: “The Democratic Party has to
reach a fundamental conclusion: Are we on the side of working people or
big-money interests?” This goes to the heart of the matter. In my view, turning
the Democratic Party – with all its undemocratic structures and anti-democratic
leadership – into a party that serves the interests of working people is
essentially impossible. While launching a new party may seem intimidating to
some, it is in fact far more realistic than attempting to fix this
corporate-controlled one. At best, putting our resources in this direction is a
long detour from the conclusion that must be reached: we need our own party,
independent of corporate cash and corporate influence.
‘Not Me, Us’
We have entered into what is
one of the most favorable moments to build a new progressive political party in
the history of the United States. There is unprecedented mass anger at the
political establishment, and widespread disillusionment with the leadership of
both political parties. A recent study found that independents will soon
outnumber registered Democrats and Republicans put together.
If Bernie were to call a
national conference to discuss launching a new party, thousands of people would
attend. There is nothing stopping Sanders, if he agreed.
Does he agree at this moment?
No, that much is clear.
But it’s also clear that
Bernie has been influenced by our movement before. Before launching his
presidential campaign he supported raising the minimum wage but hadn’t endorsed
the demand for 15. Our movement convinced him to. When he first launched his campaign
he did not have a strong platform on institutional racism. Black Lives Matter
activists pushed him forward again here, and improved his campaign.
The question of what comes
next is not just for Bernie.
As Bernie himself has
maintained from the beginning, one person alone cannot carry out a revolution
against the billionaire class. It’s even embedded in his campaign slogan: “Not
me, Us.”
It is our right, I would say our
responsibility, to try to push him forward on this critical issue, which will
help decide to what degree this movement is sustained or co-opted.
We need a tool, an organized
force, to win Medicare for All, free college education, to end mass
incarceration, and further to build a democratic socialist society based on the
needs of ordinary people and the environment. No one is going to hand it to us,
we need to rely on our own independent strength and organization to make it
happen.
For that, we need more than
just one candidate. We need our own political party, that fights alongside
social movements and labor, and that is prepared to unequivocally stand up
against the billionaire class and “welcome their contempt.” We must reject the
Democratic establishment’s demands for “party unity” inside of a party owned
and controlled by Wall Street. We need unity of ordinary people, by starting to
build a new party of, by, and for the 99%.
Sign #Movement4Bernie’s petition calling on
Bernie to run all the way and launch a new party of the 99%.
Kshama Sawant is Seattle City
Council Woman and member of Socialist
Alternative.
No comments:
Post a Comment