Make Your Vote Count for Socialism

[marmar]

from truthdig:



Make Your Vote Count for Socialism

Posted on Feb 28, 2012
By Scott Tucker


Stewart Alexander believes fair elections are worth a fair fight and he’s asking for your vote. The Occupy Wall Street movement encouraged a more honest discussion of class and capitalism in this country, but Alexander is not simply a critic of big banks and high finance. He is a democratic socialist, a military veteran opposed to militarism, an African-American community activist and the presidential candidate of the Socialist Party in 2012.

Alexander believes the candidate of “hope and change” is a defender of the status quo and of corporate rule. In his words:

“The phrase that came to mind immediately upon hearing President Barack Obama’s State of the Union speech is ‘too little, too late.’ After spending the last few years coddling the banks and the richest 1 percent, Obama has the nerve to now call for ‘economic fairness.’ To him, this means tweaking payroll taxes and making a rhetorical call to reverse the Bush tax cuts for the rich. For working people in America, real fairness means the right to a job, a guarantee of health care for all and an end to the military-industrial complex. Obama won’t deliver this. That’s why I am running for president against him.”

The boom-and-bust cycles of capitalism require a semblance of representative government, even though Congress has become the front office of the corporate state. Even the most “progressive” reforms of the tax code now proposed by career politicians remain a form of institutionalized robbery of the working and middle classes. ..................(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/make_your_vote_count_for_socialism_20120228/

[TBF]

1. At some point we should probably have a discussion in here about doing

away with the 2 party system. When Santorum is on the other side you just don't take the risk of voting for a guy like this. It's frustrating.

[white_wolf]

2. That's the good thing about living in TN.

Its going to go Republican no matter who I vote for, so I matter as well vote my conscience and vote red.

[TBF]

3. That doesn't happen in TX -

I'd be shocked if I saw a communist on any ballot in this state! Even a socialist would surprise me. Ron Paul seems to be the only "Independent" who makes it on to the ballot.

[socialist_n_TN]

7. Is the guy even on the ballot here?

nm

[white_wolf]

9. I hope so.

Who which am I going to vote for? He actually seems decent. If there's no one good I'm going to do a write Marx/Engels 2012 or Lenin/Trotsky.

[jwirr]

12. I understand where you are coming from. Grew up in Iowa and for most of my younger years had

no chance of winning. However, it is a good thing that all states give us a chance to vote for whomever we want in a general election. That way once in a while we can get a good governor or congress person.

[Starry Messenger]

4. Our "winner takes all" system really bites.

I read an insanely Marxist/wonky book from the on the origins of the two-party system in the US last year that goes into detail about the historical conditions that created what we have today. It's partially online, but in a really clunky format. (I ended up just buying a used copy so I could read it). http://leninist.biz/en/1988/UTPS414/index.txt

The upshot being that it will depend on the movement of the workers, which usually affects the make-up of each party. I don't know if the two-party system has any chance of changing, but the working class is starting to grumble in a progressive manner. Story from today:

http://inthesetimes.com/article/12700/which_side_are_you_on/

"Which Side Are You On?"

Democrats and Obama need unions – one of the few credible Democratic-leaning persuaders with blue-collar workers – to minimize the Republican advantage among moderate-income white workers with less than a college degree, a frustrated demographic that nonetheless generally shares many progressive populist economic views.

Union leaders have so far expressed their own frustration with Obama and his party in various ways, such as withholding endorsements of previously labor-backed candidates (perhaps even of Obama, says machinists union spokesman Rick Sloan); withholding money (last year the politically active, well-heeled firefighters union announced it would no longer contribute to any federal candidates, then revised plans recently to contribute to select labor champions); or not attending the Democratic national convention this year (partly because it will be in anti-union North Carolina).

Most unions also plan to revise their recent strategy to strengthen the labor movement’s political influence and, as AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka frequently insists, its “independence.” But it is now more difficult than ever for labor to find Republicans to support as an alternative to the Democratic Party. The limited Working Families Party model of cross-endorsing labor-friendly Democrats is right now the biggest left-wing hope for a labor or progressive party.

“Independence is about building our structure, about getting working people to mobilize, whether they’re union members or not, and talk about differences out there. It’s supporting people who are friends,” Trumka told In These Times in late January. “It’s about year-round mobilization that can transition quickly from electoral politics to advocacy to accountability. Those [politicians] that are real friends will get more attention from us; our marginal friends will get less attention; obviously those that aren’t friends will get the opposite kind of attention.

“It’s not about the Democratic Party or the Republican Party. It’s about workers having an independent voice in a system where people can drop in $5 or $6 million at the drop of a hat to alter a presidential race. It’s about us having that independent voice and talking to workers, union and nonunion workers.

This might seem mild to some, but I think this represents some ideological shifts.

[limpyhobbler]

5. It's good to see labor talking about that.

On the other hand, it kind of seems like they grumble a bit and issue some statements every few years. This seems a little more serious because it does have some money behind it.

But in the end they'll get in line and support Democrats across the board because they can't afford to hand an election to the republicans. The GOP has been gunning for labor big-time the past few years. (Think Wisconsin, Ohio, Indiana, the FAA bill, etc. )

The "winner take all" system is a root cause of the problem, forcing everybody to back one of the big two for fear of "spoiling" an election. Some kind of either proportional representation or run-off voting might help. Sadly there would be only one way to get the major party to see the value in that kind of reform, and that would be to threaten to split. But the major party doesn't take the threat seriously because they know we can't afford to throw the election to the worse party.

To get power in elections, it might be easier for socialists to just run as Democrats in the Democratic primaries. Those are easier elections to win anyway. It does't require as many total votes, usually it's much lower turnout. And primaries are relatively easier to win by mobilizing a street team. Even if we don't win a primary, just by campaigning we can influence the "mainstream" democrat to commit to certain principals and policies. To some extent I guess people already do this. But I'm thinking maybe we could use more of this primary politics strategy. That's something the Republican right-wing interest groups are very good at, and as a result they keep dragging their major party further and further to the right.

[Starry Messenger]

6. LOL, agreed: "it kind of seems like they grumble a bit and issue some statements every few years."

I know, maybe I'm pinning my hopes on a lot of bluster. Hopefully just the thought of migrating union dollars might shift politicians to go left a bit more. Yay, crumbs!

It would be interesting to see the reaction from the national party if socialists started running as Democrats. Usually they run away from the socialist label because of the red-baiting from the GOP. There could be more socialists running for more local offices too, using this strategy. Sadly, our establish tends to have a "smoothing out" effect on anyone progressive and dilute partisan positions, but it is certainly worth trying. Floyd Olson was pretty much a socialist and ran and won Governor of Minnesota in the 1930's. He was in the Farmer-Labor Party, which is now the DFL. http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/USAolsonFB.htm

[socialist_n_TN]

8. There is a growing sentiment for an independent worker's party..........

Even here in Tennessee. I saw it at a seminar I attended here in Nashville with some folks from various grass roots orgs and the unions.

I personally think that it's only going to happen if one of the major parties splits. Whether it's the Tbaggers and proto fascists splitting from the country club Republicans or the left and labor splitting from the "centrist" Dems, all it will take IMO is ONE of those disinfranchised groups to make the move and the OTHER one will. But because the proto fascists are so dangerous, I think they'll have to split from the CC Reps first.

[white_wolf]

10. The Republicans are interesting. It could be a three spilt.

The CCers, the Libertarians, and the Theocrats. As for the Dems, I think a few of the more progressive dems would gladly jump ship and join a worker's party. I'm almost certain Sanders would since he is an independent. Though, I could be biased, because I really like Sanders.

[TBF]

11. I'm a fan of Sanders too -

and he has been very smart in how he operates. We can probably learn a bit from him.