Spitballing a New Left Politics
I've been somewhat out of pocket the past couple of months, avoiding politics and current events to a great degree. Have had a few changes in my work life as well, which will give me a little more time for my family and my thoughts. I've been doing some reading here at C99 and at a few other places, but mostly stepping back. As a result, I've found my political views evolving somewhat beyond the direction they were taking around the time of the November election. A little slow to the table, but this essay is an attempt to begin sorting my thoughts.
It's clear to most of us that the Democratic party has outlived its usefulness as a vehicle for our political aspirations. The Sanders campaign outed it as primarily a veal pen intended to catch and neuter the left, delivering it to the same oligarchic interests that run the Republican party and the corporate media. I've read some thinking lately that debates the virtues of this politician or that, or the pros and cons of founding a new political party vs. trying once again to reform the Democrats. This all misses the point, as I now see it.
One of my favorite political observations is the famous one from Frederick Douglass:
Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never has and it never will.
An essay by the wonderful maggid today, Mom and Dad are getting divorced: A family dynamics analogy, provides another meaty quote, from Slavoj Zizek:
The marriage between democracy and capitalism is over.
Both of these quotes point toward a new direction in politics, it seems to me, away from a focus on electoral results and toward an issues-based, activist political era. The best result of the already-disastrous Trump presidency could be a new era of activism analogous to the 1960's, when millions demonstrated and held their politicians of both parties to account for their actions on the most burning issues of the day, civil rights and the Vietnam war. Today we have no-less burning issues, climate change and economic inequality. Neither political party has any significant interest in addressing either, so the people must make demands. What should those demands be?
Given the scale of our challenges, I'm currently thinking we need two central demands:
1. Removing carbon from the atmosphere.
2. Creating an economy that works for all of us, rather than one that we work for.
To create a carbon-negative human world, we need several uncompromising policies:
- Phase out the internal combustion engine.
- Phase out carbon fuels for electricity generation.
- Reduce beef and other livestock production, focusing on sustainable animal protein sources.
- Heavily tax fossil fuels commodities.
- Punitively tax corporations that extract fossil fuels.
- Invest in reforestation, soil and marine carbon sequestration, and combating desertification.
Reorienting our economy away from predatory capitalism to serving the people is even more complicated, and will be more heavily resisted in the US. I believe the most important steps in beginning this process would be to focus on one issue: a guaranteed living income for all Americans. Economic inequality has produced a profoundly cruel and unjust economy in America, in which some have wealth far in excess of any good it might do for themselves, and most have far too little to see to their needs in anything approaching a humane way. We have chosen to live in this kind of a country; we should strongly advocate a different choice.
A guaranteed annual income would insure food, shelter, health care, educational opportunity, and basic dignity to all. It has been proposed occasionally by Republicans and Democrats in recent decades, but never taken seriously. I believe it should be a bedrock principle for a new leftist politics, a non-negotiable demand.
Other issues which would help reorient our economy in a democratic direction:
- A guaranteed jobs program for those who can work, with income augmenting the basic income guarantee.
- A revised income tax exempting the guaranteed income, and starting with a low rate at the 50th income percentile. It should rise first gradually, then very steeply at high incomes, reaching perhaps 90% above $10 million.
- An annual wealth tax on the order of 1% of in-country or expatriated assets above $10 million, 3% above $100 million, 5% above $1 billion and 8% above $5 billion.
- Laws and tax policies that promote domestic employment and severely penalize offshoring to reduce labor costs or evade environmental regulation.
- Revision of corporation law to reorient corporate obligations: highest priorities to avoid adding carbon to the atmosphere or seas, and to bring economic benefit to communities in which they operate. Shareholder value would be statutorily secondary.
- Medicare for All healthcare program, providing comprehensive health and dental care for all citizens, including elder care expenses.
- Public financing of daycare, primary and secondary education, and college or technical school. Severe restrictions on for-profit educational alternatives.
Other issues are also vital to a new leftist politics, including public financing of campaigns, nonpartisan redistricting, universal voter registration, expanding anti-discrimination protections, making the criminal justice system accountable, etc. But any new politics must have a clear focus on one or two issues, ideally of greatest importance to young people.
Bernie Sanders' campaign gave us a peek at what might work. His campaign made the perhaps fatal error of joining the Democratic party, which made good tactical sense but was a poor strategic decision. Our new politics must follow the 1960's model, appealing directly to the people without the intermediation of politicians or parties. If we can create a strong movement, the political parties can either come to it or die and be replaced. That question is of secondary importance at this time. How to build the new movement, identifying who's already doing it, helping them build their strength and create interconnections are far more critical for us now.
Comments
Forgive the superficial outline
Not much original here, but I've put it down to begin organizing my thoughts. Many in this community have thought far more deeply than I have, and I will look forward to your critiques and suggestions.
Please help support caucus99percent!
So good to see you again.
And thanks for the organized outline. You sense, as many of us do, the current difficulty in herding the cats into a coherent movement. Yours could be the rallying cry we all need.
Nice to read you again, Doc.
"I can't understand why people are frightened of new ideas. I'm frightened of the old ones."
John Cage
Thanks, my friend
It sort of feels like I'm starting over, as so many of the contributions I've made in the past belong in a political world that feels dead. I don't know what comes next -- don't know if anybody does. But one great thing about this community is that it's interested in thinking and talking about such questions. It's nice to read and write here.
Please help support caucus99percent!
I feel that too.
A undeniable malaise has cursed the land! The result of untenable people in office. People that should be exiled to some barren isle in a cold climate.
"I can't understand why people are frightened of new ideas. I'm frightened of the old ones."
John Cage
If you mean Dante's Hell
where Satan is frozen in ice, then yes, you are correct.
"You can't just leave those who created the problem in charge of the solution."---Tyree Scott
That'll work!
Now where is my copy of Tchaikovsky's rendering of Dante's Inferno? It has to be here somewhere.
"I can't understand why people are frightened of new ideas. I'm frightened of the old ones."
John Cage
Of course. Count me in--but
we're not facing a policy crisis, no matter how much it seems we are. We're facing a political crisis. I guess I'm going back to your first quotation: Power concedes nothing without a demand. For it to be a demand, rather than a request, there have to be some consequences if the answer is no.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Spineless Democrats and MoveOn
Yesterday, Robert Reich, in the name of MoveOn said that we should pressure spineless Dems (i.e., almost the entire upper echelon) of course by mounting a campaign (please donate, please /s) to tell them to grow a spine. Bull. If the campaign doesn't involve primarying the bastards it will never work. If you wanna get better Dems, throw out the current lot. I don't think that will work but do support anyone willing to make the effort.
Robert Reich, yeah.
I guess he's running for the office of First Pleader Before the Emperor if the Dems ever win an election again.
"you can say what you want about this country and I love this place. I love the freedoms we used to have..." -- George Carlin
@sojourns Frankly, I'd be OK
Frankly, I'd be OK with them just taking their blood money and retiring to some gorgeous tropical island they own, and leaving us to repair their fucking damage.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
@sojourns Not that I wouldn't
Not that I wouldn't like some just punishment for these bastards, but really, at this point, all I want is for them to get out of my fucking way.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
@Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal
Which would also take them out of their purportedly-feared pitchfork-range. Why the heck don't they go to those 'emergency escape' places in New Zealand now, rather than polishing off the rest of civilization and any chance of planetary life surviving first? Why are they so intent on draining everyone else of every last cent they have, to the point of globally placing everyone's money exclusively in the hands of financial institutions, via a 'cashless society' scheme rendering everyone penniless, starving and helpless at any major power-outage/hack/'lost electronic records' claim by banks/the US-'legalized' bank robbery of their own depositors money if they ever run short by recklessly crashing or whatever, as they're soon expected to do?
How much, I wonder, does it cost to buy into the 'immortality tech' which various billionaires have been suckered into investing in for some time, and which the White House-integrated Google is working on?
Apparently a few of the very wealthiest and would-be very wealthiest do-anything-for-money types want to live forever in the hell-on-Earth they're creating in the process, substituting 'Virtual Reality' for the reality they anyway refuse to accept, and I'm seriously wondering how much this has to do with the current lunacy.
Googled: Billionaires invest immortality research - maybe try it and see what you get?
If possible, these are best read in full at source, should whatever device used be able to manage it.
Please note names and occupations involved and especially the emphasis on surrendering life in order to 'live forever' as a machine/computer program with their characteristics realistically reproduced, apparently under the notion that they themselves will not still die with their bodies, even though a recording of their personalities may continue to play while power lasts.
Obama has suggested that he's interested in joining other politicians from the Bush Admin and elsewhere as a hedge fund manager in Silicone Valley, because this matches his interest in genome research and (magical) science.
But this does nothing to improve human life-spans, rather it's eliminating life to be replaced with 'better-than-life' robots/computers. The ultimate meritocracy, in which life simply does not deserve to exist because robots/computers 'can do anything better than humans can'.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/08/20/the-immortality-financi...
Why would anyone want to outlive their bodies by nano-teching their brains, experimentally messing with what makes each of us human individuals? Sponsoring the Zombie Revolution for real?
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-04-12/billionaires-scramble-immortali...
A major problem with their theories is that - as is typical in the branch of the petrochemical/GMO/nanotech industry we term Big Pharma - they prefer to ignore biology. I've heard what we think of as aging described as being the result of insults which the body has been unable to heal - and 'cost-cutting' industrial pollution, inadequate nutrition (such as that supplied by profitable factory-farmed/GMO/petrochemically affected foods, such as with pesticides which prevent the uptake/function of essential dietary minerals) are indeed major impediments to optimized cellular-and-up biological function, to say the least. But these are so profitable to the few - the only thing to do is to ignore reality and create more 'virtual reality' to substitute for real reality and science, the latter involving the study of the former and how it works in reality. What could possibly go wrong?
Another is that these life-despising personalities are to be programmed into theoretically immortal machines forming the Singularity - what could possibly go wrong there, either? I suppose that 1984 wasn't enough of a text for them...
http://www.newsweek.com/2015/03/13/silicon-valley-trying-make-humans-imm...