No more No-True-Socialist

[luzribeiro.livejournal.com]

Bernie Sanders To Announce Presidential Run

"...Independent U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders will announce his candidacy for the Democratic presidential nomination on Thursday. ... Sanders' entry into the Democratic race ensures that Hillary Clinton will face a challenge to win the support of the liberal wing of the party. ... Sanders' basic message will be that the middle class in America has been decimated in the past two decades while wealthy people and corporations have flourished. ... And Sanders says it is imperative that all the Democratic presidential candidates address the issue of trade and income inequality."

Not that he's going to win the nomination anyway (he doesn't have any better chance than an open atheist winning the presidency), but still it's interesting that he has finally decided to run on the Democratic ticket. For his 3 decades of political career he has always run as Independent Socialist (as he calls himself), but on the other hand the left-wing has often criticized him for his voting record, pointing out that it's actually been no different from that of your ordinary liberal Democrat. Chances are that you'd find even Vermont Democrats who've at times been further to the left than Senders. In that sense, his decision to abandon his old "independent" approach may come across as a display of some honesty - at last.

But all criticism from the left aside, his reputation may suffice to allow him to fill the niche that Nader and Nucinich used to occupy, as the alternative leftist candidate. If anything he'll be the mirror opposite of the likes of Ted Cruz and Rand Paul, probably without all the crazy. In any case, it'll be curious to see a Democratic candidate who'll respond to being branded "socialist" with, "Yeah, and?"

Comments

[ddstory.livejournal.com]

He'll drop out early. It's no longer about ideas, it's all about who has the most money. In the end, the US "left" will just reluctantly vote for whoever the dems nominate, while the GOP will have to deal with a shrinking base demographic. All the dirty-laundry circus won't change much in people's minds.

[kylinrouge.livejournal.com]

I really really want him to win. Like, a lot. To the point where it's almost offensive to see everyone writing him off. He's got a lot of grassroots support. And who is his opponent? Hillary? People are sick of her before she's even running. The fact that he's running in the Democratic primaries means there's no Nader or Kucinich situation- he's not siphoning any votes in the general election. That's probably the root of his decision - if he loses, he doesn't want to sever Clinton's chances.

I actually haven't heard this 'left wing criticizes Sanders for not being liberal enough' thing... Do you have any sources on that? I thought I read somewhere that his Congressional voting record was the most liberal, while Cruz was something like 18th most conservative.

[mahnmut.livejournal.com]

I thought socialist is not much like liberal. In other words, his record being the most liberal doesn't quite help him with the "I'm the one true socialist" schtick that he's apparently trying to promote.

[abomvubuso.livejournal.com]

Well, he's been praising the Scandinavian social-democratic model. That must make him socialist enough ;)

[johnny9fingers.livejournal.com]

Mixed economy stuff used to be the preserve of Social Democrats...These days it is out-and-out communism.

[kylinrouge.livejournal.com]

Where is he going around saying that?

[mahnmut.livejournal.com]

He's running on a platform that capitalizes on his socialist credentials. As already noted, he has argued that he's "democratic socialist (http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/apr/30/bernie-sanders-confirms-presidential-run-and-damns-americas-inequities)". And he certainly hasn't complained when he's being called socialist by virtually all media, commentators and voters.

He doesn't have to step at a pedestal and yell, "Hey, I'm a socialist!" The same way Bill Clinton didn't have to explicitly declare himself Third-Way centrist.

[luzribeiro.livejournal.com]

"While it was fantastic to see Tarrant humiliated, Sanders' election to the Senate doesn't represent a radical departure from politics as usual. He may have a portrait of Eugene Debs hanging in his office, but his politics have little in common with that great American socialist."
(Ashley Smith, at the Socialist Worker (http://socialistworker.org/2006-2/610/610_11_BernieSanders.shtml))

Here's also a piece (http://www.newrepublic.com/article/121680/bernie-sanders-democratic-socialist-not-just-socialist) explaining how Bernie isn't a "socialist" but a Democratic Socialist, and where the difference is.

[dexeron.livejournal.com]

I think the difference is an important one to note, but we're not likely to see an actual "socialist" take office - or at least not see one take office with any hopes of actually achieving the socialist goals of government ownership of the means of production; that would require a revolution, and, apart from a tiny minority, there is no desire to really stray from the status-quo, even among the most liberal here in the U.S.

Sanders brand of "democratic socialism," on the other hand, is really a question of shifting the degrees to which the government participates in the current U.S. system, and might shift the overton window back to the left a bit. He's not likely to usher in a great worker's revolution (though who knows, maybe he'll lay the groundwork for it) but he might undo some of the damage caused by years of rightward shifting.

(Though, honesty, even Sanders can only do so much. I'd love that someone like him would be setting foreign policy and nominating Supreme Court Justices, but I'd much rather see a filibuster proof supermajority of Democrats in both houses of Congress. That's how we'd get some real change.)

[luzribeiro.livejournal.com]

I don't think this is annoying anybody, and neither does it always have to be about someone being annoyed. That's not the point. The point here is that there's an alternative on the left to the mainstream liberal establishment politicians, which is interesting, especially considering that the Tea Party at least claimed to have played that role on the opposite side of the barricade. There'll always be a niche for the fringe (or whatever passes for fringe in the US; like you said, in most places around the world "democratic socialist" or "social-democrat" is part of the mainstream).

[luzribeiro.livejournal.com]

(Sorry, clicked on the wrong comment to respond to).

[kylinrouge.livejournal.com]

Well of course, he's a social democrat by European terms, which is still far more left than the Democratic party. Who is this annoying? Actual socialists?

[luzribeiro.livejournal.com]

Oops, this (http://talk-politics.livejournal.com/1976722.html?thread=149471378#t149471378) was supposed to be a response to your comment. :S

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

He's the Ron Paul of the left.

[kylinrouge.livejournal.com]

So his campaign is going to be coopted by an actual progressive movement that will win the midterm elections? Sounds good to me.

[mahnmut.livejournal.com]

;-)

[sandwichwarrior.livejournal.com]

[htpcl.livejournal.com]

This will be yet another meaningless (and enormously expensive) political circus for the masses. There are many important issues that need to be addressed in a thorough and honest way - and they won't be. The real issues won't be discussed in a meaningful way. What will be discussed is how big the lapel pin with the US flag is on this candidate or that candidate, and of course... BENGHAZI!!1!1

[sandwichwarrior.livejournal.com]

While declaring someone "Dictator for life" may be far more efficient it does come with a fair number of downsides.

[htpcl.livejournal.com]

DailyQuote!

[johnny9fingers.livejournal.com]

But there's always the retirement plan on St Helena.

[mahnmut.livejournal.com]

Seems like a nice place.

[airiefairie.livejournal.com]

I do not think these labels ending with ~ist are too useful. They tend to shift the focus away from the issues the politician in question considers important, and their stances on those issues.

[ddstory.livejournal.com]

I'm okay with both focusing on the issues and spending a thought or two on the question what type of animal exactly this guy is. Doesn't cost me too much head-aches. :)

It still won't matter in the end.

[airiefairie.livejournal.com]

Media pundits like sticking convenient labels to people just because these are more catchy and can be repeated over and over, which is what the media likes to do. And that is an issue worth considering, too. Because, come campaigning time, all media outlets will be saturated with all sorts of stupid and outright grotesque campaign ads imaginable. And this, again, will further divert attention from the real issues.