Debs Tendency statement on a left third party
The Debs Tendency of the Socialist Party USA has issued a statement on the goal of creating a Left Third Party. Although this statement is directed at the Socialist Party, offering a strategy that the party should take, it also represents a proposal to reach out to others on the Left. I believe that its arguments can largely be shared by anyone on the Left who opposes working with the Democratic Party, and who understands how self-defeating it is for anyone on the left to try to work with the Democrats. The statement correctly notes that a significant faction within the Green Party (those aligned with the Progressive Democrats of America, for example), as well as some (unfortunately) within the the Socialist Party, mistakenly support the occasional Democratic Party politician, under the faulty assumption that there are some "good Democrats" who can somehow be separated from the political organization to which they are intimately connected. More importantly, such efforts at supporting "good Democrats" drain all opportunity for building a third party movement, not least because it is hard enough convincing people to abandon their loyalty to the duopoly, and that task is made impossible if even members of a third party continue to give levels of support to it.
The Debs Tendency statement implies support for working with others on the Left who also oppose the Democratic Party, not just socialists but also who may not embrace socialism. This would seem to include some members of the Green Party. The Socialist Party can, in a "non-sectarian" and "non-authoritarian" manner, argue for their position on the preferability of socialism. In that way, we maintain our integrity while showing a friendly willingness to work with others who oppose the duopoly.
The statement also refutes the idea that rejecting the Democrats as a political institution means never working with liberals or progressives on various causes of common interest. This canard occasionally gets repeated by those on the right of the Socialist Party, and it simply isn't true. Socialists can and should work with liberals and progressives in various labor, antiwar, or other organizations, in order to issue-based alliances. There is a difference between forming an issue-based alliance, and forming an electoral alliance. This is a key point. Socialists should work with liberals and progressives on issues, but should not endorse Democratic Party candidates or work within the Democratic Party per se. This difference is important, and frankly not that difficult to distinguish.
Here is the text of the Debs Tendency statement:
The Need for United Independent Political Action By The Left, Progresssive Movement Forces, Minority Communities, And Working People In General
A Statement by the Debs Tendency, Socialist Party USA
The American Left is in a time of opportunity and at the same time in a crisis of leadership. Recent events have changed the political landscape dramatically from what it was a year ago. The Iraq War, which is more obviously a war of profit and exploitation each day, has lost the support of the majority of Americans. Hurricane Katrina has ripped apart a city and an entire region, and the utterly botched response to it has laid bare the race and class divisions in American society and the increasingly crass corporatism rife in the government. Energy prices are ripping through record highs and threatening the existence of suburbia itself, as the rich get richer and the working class is slowly herded into the low-paying service industry. The Republican Party, long arrogant with power, is beleaguered by scandals among its top layers.
But the Democratic Party, long the graveyard of social movements, has failed to respond. There is barely a peep against the war, and most of that is just the tactic of replacing American helmets with United Nations helmets -- "imperialism by any other name". The most prominent Democrats, including those who would be President such as Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden, are in favor of staying in Iraq, against the now majority opinion. The Democrats have made some noises against the Republican response to Katrina, but have not shown that they are even cognizant of the race and class structures that underlie the tragedy. They have no reasonable energy solutions, and their only response to neoliberal capitalism is "more, more, more!".
It is clear that the Democrats are ideologically bankrupt, a disease that goes from the top of the party down. And the Clinton presidency of the 1990s, "a parade of neoliberal capitalism, expanded imperialism,and the death of welfare", has shown that the Democratic "lesser evil" is itself a great evil. The crisis of the Left will not be solved until it leaves the Democratic Party entirely behind.
The Socialist Party USA by itself is not in a position to become a new major party today. However, the need for one is pressing and significant. The illusion of the Democrats as an opposition party has been exposed to growing layers of people and has created a space for third parties of the Left to present a strong appeal to the American people. The SPUSA should be a part of that. We should run our own candidates at every level feasible in 2006 and 2008, and fully support other third parties of the Left wherever we have no candidates. On the local and national levels we should engage in a dialogue with other Left third parties, other socialist groups, issue movements, community struggles, and emerging labor struggles with the aim of organizing independent, united front electoral slates and electoral entities whenever possible to make the next two elections, and beyond, a major statement that there is a need for Left politics independent of the Democratic machine and capitalist politics in general. In such formations, no party, organization or tendency would have to submerge its own identity or independence.
Left third parties are not, as a prominent faction in the Green Party, a small minority of activists in our own Party, and many of the the Naderites seem to think, primarily pressure groups on the Democrats. This is defeatist thinking that can only lead to more of the same crap. In its push forward, the Left third party movement must be militant in its independence, to the point of complete electoral separation from the Democrats; and it must be firm in its uncompromising, uninterrupted mobilization and organizing of mass progressive movements, even during election cycles. If we are willing to waffle on these points, to support "good" Democrats or "just local" Democratic candidates or national Democrats in "extreme circumstances", we are starting by shooting ourselves in the foot. The "good" Democrats are part and parcel of the corporatist machine, bringing activists back into the trap of two-party politics that are our problem to begin with. The local levels are where the two-party system can most realistically be challenged. And "extreme circumstances" are just the time when we should be pointing out the bankruptcy of both major parties the most. Most people in this country have deep-seated illusions about the two party system, and we must oppose this duopoly shell game without exception if the Left third party movement is to have any credibility. This is not to say that we cannot be union members or part of broad movements that include Democrats, but that our electoral stance and strategies beyond elections must be independent.
For all these reasons, the Debs Tendency declares its support for the orientation of the Socialist Party USA toward building a united, fully independent, progressive, grass roots, working class oriented third party movement in the United States, and its militant opposition to the Democratic Party and the whole system at every level in electoral and social action. Over time and in a non-sectarian and non-domineering way, the Socialist Party should try to democratically and positively influence and educate such parties toward a socialist perspective whenever possible, a perspective that points the way toward the basic socialist transformation of society, not just its radical democratic reform.
The Debs Tendency statement implies support for working with others on the Left who also oppose the Democratic Party, not just socialists but also who may not embrace socialism. This would seem to include some members of the Green Party. The Socialist Party can, in a "non-sectarian" and "non-authoritarian" manner, argue for their position on the preferability of socialism. In that way, we maintain our integrity while showing a friendly willingness to work with others who oppose the duopoly.
The statement also refutes the idea that rejecting the Democrats as a political institution means never working with liberals or progressives on various causes of common interest. This canard occasionally gets repeated by those on the right of the Socialist Party, and it simply isn't true. Socialists can and should work with liberals and progressives in various labor, antiwar, or other organizations, in order to issue-based alliances. There is a difference between forming an issue-based alliance, and forming an electoral alliance. This is a key point. Socialists should work with liberals and progressives on issues, but should not endorse Democratic Party candidates or work within the Democratic Party per se. This difference is important, and frankly not that difficult to distinguish.
Here is the text of the Debs Tendency statement:
The Need for United Independent Political Action By The Left, Progresssive Movement Forces, Minority Communities, And Working People In General
A Statement by the Debs Tendency, Socialist Party USA
The American Left is in a time of opportunity and at the same time in a crisis of leadership. Recent events have changed the political landscape dramatically from what it was a year ago. The Iraq War, which is more obviously a war of profit and exploitation each day, has lost the support of the majority of Americans. Hurricane Katrina has ripped apart a city and an entire region, and the utterly botched response to it has laid bare the race and class divisions in American society and the increasingly crass corporatism rife in the government. Energy prices are ripping through record highs and threatening the existence of suburbia itself, as the rich get richer and the working class is slowly herded into the low-paying service industry. The Republican Party, long arrogant with power, is beleaguered by scandals among its top layers.
But the Democratic Party, long the graveyard of social movements, has failed to respond. There is barely a peep against the war, and most of that is just the tactic of replacing American helmets with United Nations helmets -- "imperialism by any other name". The most prominent Democrats, including those who would be President such as Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden, are in favor of staying in Iraq, against the now majority opinion. The Democrats have made some noises against the Republican response to Katrina, but have not shown that they are even cognizant of the race and class structures that underlie the tragedy. They have no reasonable energy solutions, and their only response to neoliberal capitalism is "more, more, more!".
It is clear that the Democrats are ideologically bankrupt, a disease that goes from the top of the party down. And the Clinton presidency of the 1990s, "a parade of neoliberal capitalism, expanded imperialism,and the death of welfare", has shown that the Democratic "lesser evil" is itself a great evil. The crisis of the Left will not be solved until it leaves the Democratic Party entirely behind.
The Socialist Party USA by itself is not in a position to become a new major party today. However, the need for one is pressing and significant. The illusion of the Democrats as an opposition party has been exposed to growing layers of people and has created a space for third parties of the Left to present a strong appeal to the American people. The SPUSA should be a part of that. We should run our own candidates at every level feasible in 2006 and 2008, and fully support other third parties of the Left wherever we have no candidates. On the local and national levels we should engage in a dialogue with other Left third parties, other socialist groups, issue movements, community struggles, and emerging labor struggles with the aim of organizing independent, united front electoral slates and electoral entities whenever possible to make the next two elections, and beyond, a major statement that there is a need for Left politics independent of the Democratic machine and capitalist politics in general. In such formations, no party, organization or tendency would have to submerge its own identity or independence.
Left third parties are not, as a prominent faction in the Green Party, a small minority of activists in our own Party, and many of the the Naderites seem to think, primarily pressure groups on the Democrats. This is defeatist thinking that can only lead to more of the same crap. In its push forward, the Left third party movement must be militant in its independence, to the point of complete electoral separation from the Democrats; and it must be firm in its uncompromising, uninterrupted mobilization and organizing of mass progressive movements, even during election cycles. If we are willing to waffle on these points, to support "good" Democrats or "just local" Democratic candidates or national Democrats in "extreme circumstances", we are starting by shooting ourselves in the foot. The "good" Democrats are part and parcel of the corporatist machine, bringing activists back into the trap of two-party politics that are our problem to begin with. The local levels are where the two-party system can most realistically be challenged. And "extreme circumstances" are just the time when we should be pointing out the bankruptcy of both major parties the most. Most people in this country have deep-seated illusions about the two party system, and we must oppose this duopoly shell game without exception if the Left third party movement is to have any credibility. This is not to say that we cannot be union members or part of broad movements that include Democrats, but that our electoral stance and strategies beyond elections must be independent.
For all these reasons, the Debs Tendency declares its support for the orientation of the Socialist Party USA toward building a united, fully independent, progressive, grass roots, working class oriented third party movement in the United States, and its militant opposition to the Democratic Party and the whole system at every level in electoral and social action. Over time and in a non-sectarian and non-domineering way, the Socialist Party should try to democratically and positively influence and educate such parties toward a socialist perspective whenever possible, a perspective that points the way toward the basic socialist transformation of society, not just its radical democratic reform.
Post a Comment