Run AOC Run

This bit from Jacobin founder and all-around maven Bhaskar Sunkara is making the rounds. Associated speculation reflects assorted political misconceptions that I will now correct.

(One of my favorite memories is when my mother told me she had been advised by one of my teachers that I was “arrogant.” It was my kindergarten teacher. But I digress.)

We are in a democratic socialist moment, so of course AOC should run, but in the Democratic primaries in 2028, not the general. A primary is a free shot at spreading a message, as 2016 was for Bernie Sanders, and now is an obviously propitious time for the Democratic Socialists of America (‘DSA’), of which AOC is a member, to make a splash. However, there are two rules that must be observed.

These rules lack the force of law, but stand on the power of tradition and norms. One is that if you compete in the primaries, you have to commit to supporting the eventual winner. The other competitors must commit to reciprocate before the results are in. If they decline, you are released from any parallel obligations.

The second is that you get two shots. If you have lost twice, the press or what passes for it has leave to write you off. First time, for a dem-soc politician, would bring a raft of press coverage. It’s kind of a man-bites-dog story, amplified by the wave of recent dem-soc victories. Second time is when it gets real; then you only do it if you can win, but if you have a realistic chance to win, the press will smother you with coverage. I doubt AOC could win in 2028, but she could set the table for a subsequent, all-out effort.

I’m forced to refer to “dem-soc,” short for democratic socialist or social-democrat, because DSA itself is held back by ideologues on its '“National Political Committee” (“NPC”) who remain confused about the best path forward. An AOC campaign wouuld stir up huge turmoil inside DSA. There is talk of a national poll of the membership to select a nominee. Such a poll would expose how little support there is for the NPC, which is why they would oppose any such poll. I’ve said the problem in the NPC is that it is full of folks who are not democratic socialists.

Some have fantasies of collecting their support in a third party. Evidently they do not understand that under the rules of politics in the U.S., third parties are not permitted to function. Others denounce political campaigns as “electoralism” though they never, ever propose any alternative method of achieving political power. I imagine they harbor absurd hallucinations about mass strikes or even less plausible precursors leading to smashing the State.

Meanwhile, legions of genuine socialists in DSA chapters ignore the loons and get about electing literal DSA members and DSA-adjacent politicians to public office, who go on to perform useful tasks. It’s the comrades in the chapters who are the real movement. Regrettably, a few smaller chapters have been taken over by aspiring Marxist-Leninist revolutionaries. These comedians reject effective, successful progressive Democratic politicians in their own districts.

We dem-socs have two huge issues upon which we can capitalize. One is Medicare For All (‘MFA’). My local not-dem-soc Democratic Party County Committee recently endorsed it at their monthly meeting, unanimosly.

I’ve said MFA is an empty box. Actually existing Medicare, I’m on it, is not all that. We could aspire to greater goals than extending existing Medicare “for all.” But any huge reform will have a myriad of moving parts. Endorsement is mostly symbolic, though now it is something more. MFA is whatever Bernie says it is. When Bernie passes from the scene, it will be whatever AOC says it is. I’ve also suggested that, rather than wait for the entire country to embrace MFA (it failed to pass despite great efforts in our bluest states), progressives should get about expanding Medicaid where possible in the most likely states, or supplementing it with additional state government benefits. Red state governments come up big in surprising areas; one such is support for community colleges.

The other huge issue is the war. I’m half-persuaded by the wave of commentary that the U.S. is stuck in a no-win situation. ‘Stuck’ to me does not preclude a settlement that Trump will try to describe as a victory. Even so, the president’s volatile personal impulses make a definitive end to the war hard to see. As time goes on, failure to resolve the conflict puts more and more salt into the wound. And we have only begun to see reports of fatalities and other casualties among U.S. troops.

While dem-soc politics engulfs us, assorted Democratic establishment hacks demand that the tide recede. One twit said socialists should find another party and not seek party resources. In fact the party provides no such resources. Moreover, when it loses a primary it violates its own principles and sabotages properly elected Democratic primary winners on the left. India Walton in Buffalo, NY, is one case in point.

More radical denunciations have been forthcoming. Exhibit A is epic sell-out James Carville, who would like to purge the most dynamic, popular segment of the party, much like what happened with the Labout Party in the United Kingdom. How is that working out for them?

Bhaskar provokes me a tad with his jab at “producerism,” which we are told is an obsolete liberal political doctrine. The alternative is, like MFA, another vague construct known as the “Green New Deal.” It should be realized that any GND reform will sell behind its promise of jobs, jobs, jobs. That’s producerism, whether you like it or not. It sells.

Thus far the chief weapon deployed against the socialist revival is the cry of Communist infiltration. That tells you the other side is bereft of substantive arguments. The commie thing may have already lost steam as the charges of antisemitism and Islamicist infiltration are punctured daily by the political success of the graceful NYC mayor. Still, it would not pay to discount the political power of the accusation. In U.S. political culture, the word ‘socialism’ is still easily connected to the specter no longer haunting Europe, or anywhere else.

Lemme tell you about Communism. I was a communist, a serious one who canvassed working class neighborhoods with my awkward message. As you could guess, little came of it. Even then the label only applied to the Soviet Union, the Peoples Republic of China, and a couple of other places, none of which I supported. It was and is mostly associated with a maximalist notion of a sudden, complete social transformation that I eventually realized will never, ever, fucking happen. The only communists left are cranks. A 60-year-old communist is a sad thing.

Today the authoritarian practices of those nations are said to be the ambition of the dem-soc movement. More nonsense, especially as MAGA explicitly supports such practices that are happening on the ground, in real time, as we speak. Says MAGA, we hate you for what you might do, even as we celebrate the same shit when Trump does it.

The Democratic Party establishment is no great shakes in this field either. My favorite exhibit is the state of siege that descends upon any Democratic city where the national convention is being staged. Obama and his FBI were no big allies of Occupy Wall Street when it was raging.

My other favorite example is how fallen Democratic titan Governor Andrew Cuomo sabotaged his own party’s dominance of the New York State Legislature. Or we could talk about how the Nevada party regulars hijacked the state party out from under the socialists who had won control, fair and square. The suckitude is overwhelming. Still, when it comes to high offices, it’s a two-party system; we have to live in it, at least for the foreseeable future.

So Go AOC Go. I’ve heard comrades say that DSA should not angle for control of the Democratic Party, in keeping with those who imagine a new third party. In other words, since the corporate enemy controls the party, true, we should abandon the struggle to uproot them. But if we’re not about doing that, I have no idea what we are doing.

A common objection to a dem-soc candidacy is that it opens the way for the other side. That is possible, but the problem with the argument is that it glosses over how extreme the other side is. You can’t lose the middle of the political spectrum, also known as the ‘median voter,’ if the opposition is certifiable. Former Bush campaign bigshot Stuart Stevens says the Republican Party is now an “extremist party.” People shy away from that. It’s the super-power of a dem-soc politician, along with the array of meat-and-potatoes programs and the special anti-war message. The domestic proposals are well-attuned to the MAGA working class constituencies, for which the anti-war position is also important. It’s a good set-up for the Left.

The extremism of the G.O.P. under MAGA and Trump opens a lot of space to their left, providing ordinary centrist Democrats plenty of room to flaunt their anti-fascist bona fides. With respect to the latter, however, it does take away their principal ‘spoiler’ argument thrown at those to their left. And when they do try the spoiler thing, it opens them up to charges that they are not so different from MAGA as they would like to make out.

And they aren’t. They roll over on anti-tax propaganda, as Obama and Biden did. They “ended Welfare as we know it.” They are poised to help the Rs screw up Social Security, which they’ve been threateing to do for decades. Their defense of immigrants and their critique of mass incarceration are weak. Their anti-war arguments accept Trump’s basic premise for his attacks — that Iran must must not have nukes of any type. Etc. That dem-soc has a future should not be surprising.