We are in the midst of a moment in American politics where change is possible; as the success of outsider candidates makes clear, a sizable body of the people want real, substantive, paradigm-shifting (perhaps even radical by American standards) change. Given the tenacity and success of establishment candidates, you can see that there are is also a sizable body of people who oppose change that comes in large increments as either unproductive or potentially disruptive.

In the Democratic race, the positions and policies of Sanders and Clinton have been dissected, compared and contrasted - but the key debate is about the kind of change we are to have.

The change debate is the transcendent issue of this contest. The contested issue is whether the American people can demand and have implemented by their "representatives" in government wholesale change, or if they must settle for minor incremental changes described as pragmatic and "progressive" (for people who like to get things done) - because the representatives must ask the permission of the 1% before proceeding.

On the campaign trail the debate is fundamentally about expectations:

In a debate with former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton Senator Sanders referred to the achievements of the Nordic countries in providing such things as universal health care and free higher education as models for the United States. Secretary Clinton responded by saying, "I love Denmark, but the United States is not Denmark." What does that mean? The allusion is not to insufficient economic resources but to unrealistic political expectations. ...

The Democratic party establishment also seems to have adopted the mindset of diminished expectations. Why else, when it had the majority, did it cave in on supporting the public option when the Affordable Care Act was being debated? Why has it consigned the accomplishments of the New Deal to the dustbin of history?

Last night I ran across an excellent post by Gaius Publius over at Down with Tyranny.

The post quotes Corey Robin:

"Amid all the accusations that Hillary Clinton is not an honest or authentic politician, that she's an endless shape-shifter who says whatever works to get her to the next primary, it's important not to lose sight of the one truth she's been telling, and will continue to tell, the voters: things will not get better. Ever. At first, I thought this was just an electoral ploy against Sanders: don't listen to the guy promising the moon. No such thing as a free lunch and all that. But it goes deeper. The American ruling class has been trying to figure out for years, if not decades, how to manage decline, how to get Americans to get used to diminished expectations, how to adapt to the notion that life for the next generation will be worse than for the previous generation, and now, how to accept (as Alex Gourevitch reminded me tonight) low to zero growth rates as the new economic normal. Clinton's campaign message isn't just for Bernie voters; it's for everyone. Expect little, deserve less, ask for nothing. When the leading candidate of the more left of the two parties is saying that - and getting the majority of its voters to embrace that message - the work of the American ruling class is done."

He goes on to quote Avedon Carol:

In Germany after WWI, austerity imposed by outsiders created the conditions for fascism to grow. We knew this. We were even taught this in school. And we certainly know just how good that is for women and minorities.

But in America (and Britain), that austerity is being imposed by our own leaders, and most effectively by leaders of the Democratic Party (and Labour Party) — the supposed "left" party, the party that was understood to support working people.

Clinton, like all of the DLC, talks like this "new economy" of decline is something that just happened, like it's a natural force. They do not admit that it was a political decision to break the power of ordinary working people and put it back into the hands of the aristocracy. They pat us on the head and tell us they will try not to make it as bad as the Republicans will, but it will happen and there is nothing to be done about it.

Clinton and the vast left wing establishment do the work of the 1% (which funds their campaigns and the campaigns of their right-wing rivals) by creating both the diminished circumstances of Americans through austerity policies and the "insurmountable obstacle" to truly substantive change, fabled in Clinton's campaign rhetoric.

It's a giant non-military psy-op.

While Clinton harrumphs about Republican obstructionism, Bernie Sanders talks about mobilizing the greatest force in American politics, the force upon whose consent the whole edifice relies for legitimacy - American citizens.

Clinton's campaign is about getting people to accept the decline and manage their perceptions, expectations and demands.

Sanders' campaign is about resistance, taking back the reins of power from a corrupt establishment and the 1% that owns it.

As Gaius Publius puts it,"Both parties are giving away the store, cleaning out the cash register. ... The Democrats want to soften the blow more than the Republicans — a kinder, gentler devastation if you will. A softer crash landing. ...

That's what this election is about — on both sides. Acceptance or resistance."