After hours of watching election results on Tuesday
night, I came away with a sense of puzzlement about the meaning of the outcome.
As a democratic socialist activist, and a compulsive blogger I feel compelled
to force the complexity of contemporary history into categories to facilitate
understanding and perhaps to deduce “a plan of political work” for the coming
period.
To begin, I report on the results of elections in my
home state, Indiana, and local community, Tippecanoe County.
At the top of the ticket incumbent centrist Democratic
Senator Joe Donnelly lost by a large margin to a conservative Republican, Mike
Braun. (When I moved to Indiana in 1967 the two Senators Birch Bayh and Vance
Hartke, both Democrats, had already declared their opposition to the escalating
war in Vietnam. Then, also, Indiana was one of the ten states with the largest
percentage of workers in unions). The rest of the state ticket on the ballot,
Secretary of State, Treasurer, and Auditor went Republican as well. The
Republican candidate for Congress in the 4th Congressional District,
replacing conservative Todd Rokita, won as well.
However, Democrats won races for two State
Representatives, two County Council members, a County Assessor, Township
Advisory Board Trustee members, Township Trustee positions, and even County Sheriff. Many
of these Democratic candidates are active in various progressive organizations
in the county, such as Lafayette Indivisible and the Greater Lafayette
Progressives. Some were organizers of or participants in the large Lafayette women’s rally in
January, 2017 or the Resistance Fair, which was attended by 500 people from
the county, in February, 2017. While local candidates and their supporters
worked for the statewide Democratic ticket, they were visible and energetic
workers for the Democrats running in the county.
Next, I reflect on election results around the
country:
First, most states are really multiple geographic
communities with their own forms of political organization, demographics, and
culture. For example, Indiana is really three states—a northern section formerly
industrialized and racially diverse; a central part of the state with pockets
of liberalism in a sea of traditional conservativism; and a southern part of
the state which has traditionally embraced a politics and culture close to the
white South. In addition, in Indiana, as with many other states, there are
university communities which may have political characteristics different from
surrounding areas. Television analysts, as they reviewed voting patterns in
statewide races, such as Florida and Texas, also identified clear geographic differences
and factors that affect electoral outcomes. “Red” and “Blue” currently are
signifiers for these deep differences in communities.
Second, given the special significance of state races
in comparison to local contests candidates running for statewide office draw
the largest amount of money, media coverage, and support from outside
influentials. And despite the extraordinary diversity of communities within
states, most attention, analysis, and summaries are about state politics not
local politics.
Third, political activists allocate their resources,
time and money, disproportionately to state-level races at the expense of their
local work. And state parties are often insufficiently knowledgeable or
experienced enough to help candidates running for office in local races. Some state
Democratic parties are embroiled in internal conflicts which impair support for
local candidates and grassroots campaigns.
Fourth, at state and local levels, voter suppression
is a growing constraint on the electoral process. This includes,
gerrymandering, new voter identification laws, reducing the hours of voting,
moving and/or eliminating voting stations, and, in the end, relying on machine
tabulations that sometimes are reportedly erroneous. Some of the outcomes of
races may in fact have been affected by the manipulation of just a few thousand
votes. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/nov/04/america-minority-rule-voter-suppression-gerrymandering-supreme-court?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Gmail&fbclid=IwAR08SY-j-fMeDupUbRTXejNrYE3OBXDhPhYIANYXksdSSm_S8fuDT1Wyn54
Fifth, and to varying degrees, the political culture
of white supremacy, remains an albatross around the neck of the body politic. As
Peter Beinhart put it: “The harsh truth is this: Racism often works. Cross-racial
coalitions for economic justice are the exception in American history.
Mobilizing white people to protect their racial dominance is the norm. The
lesson of 2018 is that American politics is not reverting to “normal.” In many
ways, Trumpism is normal. It’s not Trump who is running uphill against American
tradition, it’s the people who are trying bravely-- but with mixed success--to
stop him.” ( https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/11/trump-and-harsh-truth-exposed-midterms/575128/?fbclid=IwAR0dR4yD0G2voqad6FxIUCLXP2D51QNeaKBeeNpfVQSWOUKj8L3xBg9NDYU).
Sixth, and what should not be forgotten, is that
elections are controlled by the economic ruling class, directly or indirectly.
Most candidates are wealthy. Huge bundles of money come from billionaires such
as the Koch brothers. And, media frames are shaped by corporations and banks.
All this so far is less the case at the local level.
The attention above has been on the state races but
some differences can be noted in local races for candidates for Congressional
seats, state legislative assemblies, and various county and city offices. Most
of these races involve candidates who have roots in their communities (with the
exception of some candidates from outrageously gerrymandered districts). Many
candidates are not wealthy. Many of them go “door-to-door” to recruit voters.
For the most part, candidates and their supporters are more issue-oriented. And
these local activists, along with promoting candidates and issue platforms, are
major advocates for voting. Finally, local candidates get resources from and
are influenced by progressive, usually issue-oriented groups, in their
communities. In the end, local and Congressional races are decidedly more
grassroots races and as a result more reflective of democratic participation in
the electoral process.
What does this mean for left/progressive activists.
First, of course, elections matter, even the state and national ones. Second,
key work needs to be done at the local level, with the expectation that local
mobilizations will begin to transform the work done at state and national
levels. Third, local work should continue to prioritize issues, not
personalities, or ideologies: health care, living wages, jobs, education,
transportation, the environment, and contrasting expenditures on these with
military spending.
While doing the organizing, working with those in single issue groups, advocating for issues salient to local communities, progressives can continue to introduce larger more systemic analyses of the economy, the polity, and the culture. People are more comfortable today discussing Wall Street, financiers, the military/industrial complex, the corporate polluters, and the traditions of white supremacy and nativism. Progressives can continue to make the connections between these as they do grassroots work. In addition to building progressive caucuses in the Democratic Party or establishing third parties where feasible, study groups can be encouraged as well as film series, lectures, and even working with allies to construct progressive educational programs at libraries, churches, and other public spaces.
The modest victories for progressive change in 2018
can be seen as a step in the direction of recapturing a progressive majority
and a more humane society in the years ahead.While doing the organizing, working with those in single issue groups, advocating for issues salient to local communities, progressives can continue to introduce larger more systemic analyses of the economy, the polity, and the culture. People are more comfortable today discussing Wall Street, financiers, the military/industrial complex, the corporate polluters, and the traditions of white supremacy and nativism. Progressives can continue to make the connections between these as they do grassroots work. In addition to building progressive caucuses in the Democratic Party or establishing third parties where feasible, study groups can be encouraged as well as film series, lectures, and even working with allies to construct progressive educational programs at libraries, churches, and other public spaces.