Dear Groundwork

("Groundwork" is one of the not-crazy factions of Democratic Socialists of America--"DSA")

I sat through most of your Zoom on the DNC. Rest assured I won’t be giving anybody away. (Some DSA members decline to provide their names, as if we are part of the French partisan underground under Nazi occupation. Of course, I realize some people could have better reasons for going anonymous online. If it’s the State you’re afraid of, I have to think it can find you under any circumstances.)

But I digress. To the political question. DSA’s problem is reconciling its neutral-leaning-negative posture regarding a Democratic victory in November with the DP’s unconscionable stance on Gaza. I continue to believe this implicit indecision is an unexamined moralistic position.

It is unexamined and ultimately immoral because it fails to grapple with the fates of the peoples of Gaza, the West Bank, Lebanon, Yemen, and Iran under a second Trump presidency. Unleashing Netanyahu and Israel on Gaza and the West Bank, an undoubtable effect, could be the least of it.

I have yet to hear anybody in DSA address this in other than moralistic terms. Morality in and of itself is an unreliable guide to political strategy. Groundwork avoids the fantastical notions we observe in other DSA factions, but it still fails to grasp the nettle of how to approach a highly consequential election that happens in just a few months.

The convention is now history. I happen to think failing to allow any platform for a Palestinian was an unforced error, or an own goal. But that is now water over the dam.

Now comes a Groundwork commentary on the Democratic National Convention from Kareem Elrefai in The Nation. His focus is the speech at the DNC by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. He accuses her of “betraying” Gaza by advancing a “false narrative” justifying the policies of the Biden Administration. Elrefai also complains about issues AOC either downplayed or failed to mention altogether.

Convention minutes are precious, so it is foolish to expect most speakers to do a Fidel Castro stemwinder that unpacks everything. Bill Clinton and Oprah have the standing to babble interminably, but most do not. But let’s get to Gaza.

The Administration’s softness on the Netanyahu regime is not episodic but in line with 80 years of U.S. foreign policy, which in this context anchors U.S. policy in the Israeli settler state. (There is more to the story, to be sure, but that Israel is a colonialist settler state is a no-brainer in my book.) The fact that polls show this to be unpopular is irrelevant. Polls show other things that are unpopular that the political system proves incapable of addressing. As Portuguese Communist leader Álvaro Cunhal once said, “Politics is not arithmetic.”

In her speech, AOC declined to grapple with the main trend of U.S. foreign policy. I think it is reasonable to leave this debate for a more conducive political time and environment. At this particular moment, we have a bigger fish to fry. A big, fat orange one, in particular. So it wasn’t a “lie” or a betrayal, it was a political maneuver. It could have been called a betrayal if AOC has previously pledged to do otherwise, but she did not.

Elrefai attributes AOC’s tactics to her political ambitions. His view is this is potentially reasonable as long as it avoids crossing any “red lines.” To be sure, Gaza is a supreme moral question of the day.

We still have to ask the benefit — to anyone — from AOC going off the reservation. Note that the convention was one uninterrupted infomercial for Harris/Walz. Unlike conventions of the past, conventions are no longer a place for political debate, or even conversation. There is no political case for taking stands that benefit nobody.

It is interesting to note that Elrefai contrasts a bit of Bernie Sanders’s speech favorably to AOC. What did Bernie say? Elrefai quotes as follows: “We must end this horrific war in Gaza, bring home the hostages, and demand an immediate ceasefire.” Biden said something in a similar vein. This may make some people feel good, but it is, like Harris’s words, a big bowl of nothing. Apparently, some people are easy marks. The only move that could change Israel’s behavior is a threat to interrupt arms shipments. Maybe. It’s the “sanctions” piece of BDS (boycott, divestment, sanctions). Remember BDS?

If we can escape Trump’s Genocide 2.0, or Trump Coup, the Sequel, building a peace movement should be a priority. Until then, theater criticism of Democratic speeches, you said this, you should have said that, are of little consequence.