Wednesday 3 August 2016

Course Correction

Bernie's And Busted: When idealistic young people, most of them utterly unprepared, are pushed into the thrusting, beating and grinding behemoth that is the Democratic Party machine, and told to disrupt it, how shocked the party's critics claim to be, how dismayed, when the machine chews them up and spits them out. As if the Old Left had no idea that, to paraphrase Boromir in Lord of the Rings: “One does not simply walk into the Democratic National Convention.”

JEFFREY ST. CLAIR writes for the American on-line magazine Counterpunch. To read his excoriating critique of the Democratic National Convention is to feel the intense frustration and rage of the progressive American Left.
 
A sample: “Hillary has already out-Thatchered the Iron Lady and she hasn’t been elected yet. She’s made the complete metamorphosis from a Goldwater girl to a McGovern woman to a Reagan granny.”
 
That same frustration and rage was evident in the “Bernie-or-Bust” dead-enders’ attempts to disrupt the Convention. Their petulant bewilderment at being stiff-armed by the event’s organisers and security staff proof of just what a children’s crusade the Bernie Sanders candidacy had become in some US states – California in particular.
 
The Democratic Party is a machine: huge and unforgiving. St. Clair and his fellow critics on the Left know this. It is why they seem to enjoy nothing more than taking their readers into the heart of the mechanism. They point to its massive pistons pumping, its huge gears grinding, the controlled explosions in its vast cylinders, and they profess to be shocked.
 
And when idealistic young people, most of them utterly unprepared, are pushed into this thrusting, beating and grinding behemoth and told to disrupt it, how shocked the critics claim to be, how dismayed, when the machine chews them up and spits them out. As if the Old Left had no idea that, to paraphrase Boromir in Lord of the Rings: “One does not simply walk into the Democratic National Convention.”
 
Unacknowledged amid all this shock and dismay is the simple fact that without the brute force of the Democratic Party’s political machine: without the Wall Street donors, the SuperPACs, the media manipulation and the cheap parliamentary tricks designed to keep nay-sayers off the platform and away from the cameras; progressive politics in the United States would make no headway whatsoever.
 
Sanders grasped this simple fact. That’s why, to the boos of his supporters, he urged them to get in behind Hillary Clinton. Even if his followers failed to grasp it, the most important truth about the Democratic Party machine isn’t how it works, but in which direction it is steered.
 
Listening to Hillary Clinton’s acceptance speech all Jeffrey St. Clair heard was compromise, betrayal and “proto-fascism”. A less jaundiced observer would have heard something much more encouraging. Amid all the patriotic flourishes and the merciless deconstruction of the hollow, clay-footed god that is Donald Trump, a sensitive ear would have detected the crunch and groan of the Democratic Party changing course.
 
Not enough to silence the Bernie-or-Bust dead-enders; and nowhere near enough to mute the criticism of Jeffrey St. Clair; but more than enough to send a shiver down the spine of New Zealand’s Ambassador to the United States, the former Trade Minister, Tim Groser. Barack Obama would like to end his presidency with the congressional ratification of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, but Hillary Clinton is pledged to take the Oath of Office over TPP’s unratified corpse.
 
It was another female US Secretary of State, Madeleine Albright, who described the United States of America as “the indispensable nation”. When all other nations are stepping back, it is the United States that must step forward. In doing so, the United States reveals itself as not only the world’s indispensable nation, but also as its essential leader and guide.
 
This is the geopolitical reality that makes the presidential election of 2016 so critical. If Donald Trump wins, and puts “America First”, then the United States will have signalled its intention to step back and away from its leadership role. But if Hillary wins, as I believe she will, then the United States will begin the long, slow process of leading the world away from the self-destructive shibboleths of neoliberalism.
 
Hillary Clinton and the Democratic National Convention did not swing the wheel of American politics as hard to port as Jeffrey St. Clair and the Bernie-or-Bust dead-enders so obviously desired. But, on a long journey, even a small course correction can alter a vessel’s ultimate destination to a surprising degree.
 
In his glorious anthem, Democracy, Leonard Cohen urges on the USA, that indispensable vessel of the world’s hope:
 
Sail on, sail on
O mighty Ship of State!
To the Shores of Need
Past the Reefs of Greed
Through the Squalls of Hate.
Sail on, sail on, sail on.
 
Such is the political course dictated to Hillary Clinton, not only by what Bernie Sanders calls “the most progressive platform in the history of the Democratic Party”, but by the necessity of repairing an economic system that serves only obscene wealth. Redistributing that wealth isn’t just an ethical imperative, it is a sociological necessity. Inequality is the supreme solvent of human solidarity and social justice.
 
The choice before the American electorate has become existentially clear: sail on, or sink.
 
This essay was originally published in The Press of Tuesday, 2 August 2016.

17 comments:

Anonymous said...

“the most progressive platform in the history of the Democratic Party”,

Perhaps it is, but I wouldn't mind betting it will be dumped once she and Bill move into the White House.

Anonymous said...

Bernie Sanders and indeed the rank and file democratic party members all turned Hillary Clinton and the Brass of the Democratic party away from the TPPA.
Donald Trump was perhaps the biggest contributor.
I hope the rank and file of the Labour Party have the same success with our careerist MP Labour caucus at their 100 year conference in November.
The present Labour caucus policy of 'we are not in favour of TPPA, but if elected we will retain our membership' is not membership endorsed. It is also a gutless and pure bollocks policy.

The American Presidential election is fast becoming one of the most followed political elections in the history of mankind because of the Donald Trump factor.
Exciting but scary, politico's are all singing "who could ask for anything more".

Another good piece of research and writing, should get wider coverage. Thank you.

Guerilla Surgeon said...

"without the brute force of the Democratic Party’s political machine: without the Wall Street donors, the SuperPACs, the media manipulation and the cheap parliamentary tricks designed to keep nay-sayers off the platform and away from the cameras; progressive politics in the United States would make no headway whatsoever."
If this cynical view is the truth, there is absolutely no point in youthful idealism, or any idealism at all for that matter. There's no room for the Bernie Sanders of this world, America is fucked, indeed we are all fucked in that case, and young people in particular might as well bend over and kiss their arses goodbye.

I see very little evidence that Clinton is willing to swerve the Democrats off the neoliberal cause which she has been locked into for some years. She did – under pressure – promise to look at the TPP which she previously called the gold standard. But left herself plenty of wriggle room. If you look at her campaign promises, they are typical Blairite nibbling round the edges. I suppose you can't expect too much more in the US, but at least Bernie got the kids excited.

She has promised to do something about campaign financing, which is the ugliest feature of American politics so thank God for that.

But I don't blame Sanders supporters for being pissed off, and I think it's wrong to use a pejorative like petulant. He was in with a chance, but the Democrat party machine just bulldozed him out of the way. And many Americans feel that whoever they vote for in this latest election no one is going to look after their interests. Don't blame them for that either.

David Stone said...

Hi Chris
You have a very different view of what Hillary Clinton will do to my view. I hope you'r right, but I am much afraid her newfound opposition to TPP, once she is in control will be gone by lunchtime , and that under her presidency what U S is likely to Lead and guide the world into is more hegemony , more pillaging of resources , more neoliberalism and more and more war.
Cheers DJ S

Guerilla Surgeon said...

Dammit, I might also say that Hillary is in the interesting position of being able to promise whatever she likes, because unless there are radical changes in the Senate and the House, she ain't gonna be able to do nothin'.

Nick J said...

Long long shot Chris. You have written at length about the difficulty of getting rid of the neolib nexus. Do you really think that all those corporate megabucks flung at Hillary will go away peacefully? Sounds too good to be true....hope you are right but somehow I think not.

pat said...

two upbeat musings on the trot......you appear to have gained a spring in your step...long may it continue.

Anonymous said...

It won't be done by leaving the goats in charge of the garden.

Mick

jh said...

Unacknowledged amid all this shock and dismay is the simple fact that without the brute force of the Democratic Party’s political machine: without the Wall Street donors, the SuperPACs, the media manipulation and the cheap parliamentary tricks designed to keep nay-sayers off the platform and away from the cameras; progressive politics in the United States would make no headway whatsoever.
........
I get chastised for going on about immigration yet Katherine Ryan on Nine to Noon is havinga field day. Today she had James Lui from Victoria University (staunch defender of multiculturalsim). he talked of "monkey brain" versus (I forget the exact words) "cold statistics, citing recent stats on foreign buyers of Auckland property declaring "it is Kiwi investors" buying property. Katherine Ryan quoted Nigel Farange who said people are sick of experts and her point was that they are the experts. The former I'm unsure about as I haven't looked in detail but I understand (still) not much weight can be put on those statistics? As for the latter I have seen experts taken to task by UK Migration watch on how (eg) figures for the fiscal effects of migrants are garnered. Also you have the likes of Peter Sullivan (UN envoy for migration saying "all the experts agree that migration benefits the host society". Occasionally she reads out an email. Here in NZ our own distinguished Professor Spoonley (Royal Society) tells Q & A that Auckland becomes a better place to live as it's population grows and "(I would argue) more interesting".

Anonymous said...

Its political Mardi Gras time, what's more you may be right, good piece.

Bushbaptist said...

When Hills put her name forward, Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (on CNN I think) stated categorically that Hills was going to get the nomination. Not because she is best qualified or she has the best experience but because it was HER TURN!!It was promised to her when Bams beat her in the last pressie election. It would not have mattered who was running against her, she was going to get the nomination, end of story!

Hills has some serious health issues that the media is covering up. She had a fall some years ago and had concussion that has done some damage and she gets seizures like mini-epileptic fits. She has hypothyroidism too which makes her faint at the most awkward times.

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/07/wow-hillary-suffer-another-seizure-last-night-dnc-speech/

https://youtu.be/jtU5nMbEsQ4

This describes the Dem Convention very well: http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/why-bernie-delegates-shouting

The Goldman Girl ain't gunna crack down on Wall St. If anyone thinks that they are living in La La Land. Wall St. pays her bills!

Anonymous said...

Chris,
I am a Kiwi, who has lived my whole working live in the US. Now retired and visiting my homeland on a vacation. I am, and have always, voted for the Democratic ticket.

Have for some time read your blog. Mostly agreeing with you.

I am quite shocked today to see shilling for Hillary, the Queen of Chaos.

Here is my perspective on the upcoming US Presidential election.

Sadly, America’s debauched political system in 2016 is rigged to assure one of its two neocon-infested duopoly wings wins.

Our choice each “election” has more and more become between the lesser of two abominable neo-liberal evils that no sensible person should support. The neo-liberals will win no matter what.

This year, Hillary is by far the most recklessly dangerous of two unacceptable options. A total neo-liberal by any definition of the term. Subservient to Wall Street and the Military Industrial Complex. A 100% Israel-firster. An escalated war on humanity is certain if she succeeds Obama - maybe the unthinkable horror of WW III with nuclear weapons threatening the end of us all.

Who can support such madness! Is Trump any better? At the margins at most. Whoever heard of a billionaire tycoon populist serving everyone equitably, concerned about anything besides himself and the special interests he represents? But on foreign policy there is a small chance that Trump will be better. A very small chance I admit.

Americans face the same dilemma more than ever this “election.” Their only sensible option is vote independent or stay home.

I'm undecided as to whether I will stay home, obey my conscience and vote For Jill Stein, or in a desperate vote for peace, vote for Trump. I will never vote for crooked Hillary.

Dennis

Anonymous said...

That would be Madeleine "We think the price is worth it" Albright. I guess the people of these countries still celebrate the attentions of the indispensable vessel of hope: Iran, Guatemala, Indonesia, Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Brazil, Dominican Republic, Cuba, Bolivia, Chile, Grenada, Afghanistan, Somalia, Iraq, Haiti, Honduras, Libya etc.

Guerilla Surgeon said...

Maybe this is why they're "petulant":
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/dogmadebate/2016/08/corruption-the-new-apple-pie/

Dennis Frank said...

Yes, destroying the idealism of the younger generation performs an essential rite of passage for them. You're not wrong. Hobbes' concept of Leviathan applies, eh? Realpolitik confronting of the beast is a maturing educational experience. The subversive in me hopes those hopelessly naive young leftists will develop the collective expertise to slay the Democrat dragon in its lair someday...

Meanwhile, we'll keep being entertained by the emotional intelligence exhibited by their leader: pointing to an invisible person off-camera with a vacuous smile on her face every time she comes on stage at a rally is an excellent way to signal to the viewer that it's not all about her. It's about random unknown acolytes who worship her. How else can a geriatric woman become the leader of the free world? Not by impressing people with intelligent ideas. That would send the wrong signal: that she's got what it takes. She knows how badly it failed for Obama - two terms and nothing to show for it.

And the really impressive thing; she's so careful not to offer any solutions to any global problems. Not only that, she's refrained from offering solutions to any domestic US problems too. Such exemplary fortitude. Almost zen-like in ascetic self-denial. You can tell how much she really wants to help people, yet her iron self-control prevents the slightest hint of it escaping. Truly a worthy successor to Thatcher. In style. Too bad about the (lack of) substance.

Andrew Nichols said...

But if Hillary wins, as I believe she will, then the United States will begin the long, slow process of leading the world away from the self-destructive shibboleths of neoliberalism.

I really thought you were a smart bloke until I read this. Quite simply - You dont get vast sums from Wall Street to upset the existing neoliberal paradigm.

There will be no change in this area. That I could live with but I am truly terrified by her likely foreign policy. After her record in Libya Syria , Ukraine and the Honduran Coup to name but a few dissaters and her visceral hatred of Russia I seriously wonder how you think we can avoid WW3 under her watch.

jh said...

What exactly is neoliberalism? When i did Econ 101 and 201 it was just the state of the play for economic theory. A whole lot of models expressed in graphical form. That was in the 1970's. We seem to be being presented with an either/or dichotomy? If so what is it?
What I see looming is limits to growth and this is an unpopular notion with the libertarian right since it implies: "you can grow your pie because I grow mine" versus "we have to share the pie" ; it is unpopular with the left because they like to assume there is an Uncle Scrooge (with a vault which he dives into for recreation): "immigration isn't a problem, we just haven't kept up with the state house building program" and "Rich Europe can absorb the refugees..".
I'm not sure peak oil has come and gone, it just seems more like (as an analogy) the patient has clogged arteries and high oil prices (expensive oil) kills demand. Michael Reddell is suggesting what appears to be a rather commonsense position, that developed countries reach a peak potential and no longer benefit from a bigger crew. A position such as that will be unpopular with bank economists (and others sectors dependent on growth as well as leftists of the internationalist tradition (those who appear on The Nation?