On 10/28/15, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
This is especially for Roger and Carl.This is the problem I have with handles. Bernie Sanders is not going
Is Bernie Sanders Dangerous to Socialism?
Wednesday, 28 October 2015 00:00 By Emma Caterine, Truthout | Op-Ed
Presidential candidate Bernie Sanders delivers an address on how to spur
the US economy at Brookings Institution in Washington, DC, February 9,
2015.
(Photo: Brookings Institution)
Do you want to see more stories like this published? Click here to help
Truthout continue doing this work!
"... the mistakes that are made by a truly revolutionary workers' movement
are, historically speaking, immeasurably more fruitful and more valuable
than the infallibility of the best possible 'Central Committee.'" - Rosa
Luxemburg, democratic socialist, Rosa Luxemburg Reader (p. 265, p. 444).
On October 18, 2015, presidential candidate Bernie Sanders decided that
Iowa
City would be where he declared what "democratic socialism" means to him. A
bit shy of a 13-point program, Sanders did cite some helpful examples of
what he considers socialist institutions: Social Security, Medicare and the
police. Interestingly, the last time I heard these institutions in the
United States referred to as socialist was when they were being attacked by
libertarians like Ron Paul and Ross Perot. Apparently the populist
independent-turned-Democrat from Vermont and the unrepentant capitalists
share the viewpoint that government institutions are inherently socialist.
I could laugh off the reactionary ravings of the right wing. But my heart
sank when I saw Sanders' statements. Empirically and historically
incorrect,
they endanger any hope for building socialism in the United States through
a
doublespeak of calling liberal institutions socialist.
It may seem nitpicky to the unfamiliar, but Sanders' politics are actually
what is commonly referred to as social democracy. Social democrats believe
that the purpose of the state is to intervene in, but not take over, the
capitalist economy in order to promote social justice. The countries that
Sanders loves to idolize - the Nordic nations - are often called social
democracies. While less broad and generous than the Nordic welfare
programs,
the United States' Social Security and Medicare programs can also be called
social democratic programs.
In fact, echoing the "Obama is a socialist" sentiments of the modern Tea
Party, opponents of Social Security in the late 1930s claimed that it was
socialism. But it is very much not. Socialism is ownership by workers of
the
means of production, or worker control of the economy. The different types
of socialism are different proposals of how to accomplish these aims, from
the "transitional programs" of Trotskyists to the autonomous collectives of
syndicalists.
Social Security, on the other hand, is intervention into the capitalist
economy. Rather than building workers' power, Social Security gives them
"social insurance" based on the very same unequal metrics - wages that
created the need for the intervention. It is like a consolation prize for
losing capitalism! President Franklin Delano Roosevelt's New Deal brought
on
a "golden age of capitalism," and is still referenced as such by the
capitalist apologists of today.
In a time when resistance by people of color against racist police is held
as the modern example of "people power," even some liberals must have been
thrown by Bernie Sanders' classification of police as socialist. But the
New
York City Police Department is described as at the "cutting edge" of
policing, and "pioneering" new ways to be more sensitive to "the
community."
Surely this "progressive" police department would demonstrate the
"socialism" Sanders says is exemplified by police. But rather than the
workers democratically controlling how policing operates, the NYPD is run
by
a strict hierarchy. There are 13 tiers, from the new officers making
$41,975
per year to NYPD Commissioner Bill Bratton's $205,180. While the department
receives $4.8 billion per year from the government, it is talked about like
a global franchise. The assertion that the police are a socialist
institution is even more preposterous when historically they have
functioned
to protect the property of the wealthy and prevent leftist uprisings by
groups like the Black Panther Party, the Young Lords and the American
Indian
Movement.
Bernie Sanders' statements are inaccurate, but is he dangerous to
socialists? Unfortunately, social democrats like Sanders have demonstrated
in the past that at crucial moments, they will side with the right wing
over
actual socialists.
It was December 30, 1918, in Berlin, and Rosa Luxemburg had enough. "Red
Rosa" had long been a firebrand in German politics: organizing sex workers,
fighting against capital punishment and war, successfully calling multiple
general strikes and writing a book on Marxist economics that both
compliments and builds on Marx's Capital. Supporting the kaiser in World
War
I and resisting the new workers' councils, the Social Democratic Party
(SDP)
of Germany had proven to be detrimental to the fight for socialism. The war
had split the socialists of the country: the SDP believing in reforming
capitalism, the Communist Party (which Luxemburg had formed after the war)
wanting to replicate a more democratic version of the Bolshevik Revolution
in Russia.
"Our solution," Luxemburg declared in a speech, "offers the only means of
saving human society from destruction." Luxemburg and her Communist Party
of
Germany threatened the Social Democratic Party with open defiance. So the
SDP ordered the Freikorps, right-wingers known as a "precursor to Nazism,"
to suppress the rebellion. Luxemburg was captured, tortured and killed.
Obviously we do not live in quite as turbulent times as Germany was in
then,
but the simultaneous rise of populism on both the left (represented by
Sanders) and the right (represented by Donald Trump), with no challenge to
capitalism itself, should at least concern American leftists.
The socialists of this country must cease pulling punches with Bernie
Sanders, often held in the hope that his candidacy is an entryway to actual
socialism. When we make such compromises, we underestimate how well Sanders
can make his social democratic ideas a dead end in capitalism, rather than
a
path to socialism. We need transitional programs like Socialist
Alternative's strategy in Seattle. That is pragmatism. There is nothing
pragmatic about the dead end of social democracy. And there is nothing
revolutionary about socialism in name only.
Copyright, Truthout. May not be reprinted without permission.
EMMA CATERINE
Emma is resident Marxist troublemaker and student at the CUNY School of
Law.
She has written for Autostraddle, Feministing, The Feminist Wire, RH
Reality
Check, and co-authored Red Umbrella Project's "Criminal, Victim, or
Worker?"
report on the Human Trafficking Intervention Courts.
RELATED STORIES
Will Americans Vote for a Democratic Socialist?
By Lawrence S. Wittner, Truthout | Op-Ed
A Socialist Surge in the US? Bernie Sanders Draws Record Crowds, Praises
Greek Anti-Austerity Vote
By Amy Goodman, Democracy Now! | Video Interview
What One Historian Wishes Bernie Sanders Said About Being a Socialist
By Bernard Weisberger, Moyers & Company | Op-Ed
________________________________________
Show Comments
Hide Comments
<a href="http://truthout.disqus.com/?url=ref";>View the discussion
thread.</a>
Error! Hyperlink reference not valid.
Is Bernie Sanders Dangerous to Socialism?
Wednesday, 28 October 2015 00:00 By Emma Caterine, Truthout | Op-Ed
. font size Error! Hyperlink reference not valid. Error! Hyperlink
reference not valid.Error! Hyperlink reference not valid. Error! Hyperlink
reference not valid.
. Presidential candidate Bernie Sanders delivers an address on how to
spur the US economy at Brookings Institution in Washington, DC, February 9,
2015. (Photo: Brookings Institution)
. Do you want to see more stories like this published? Click here to
help Truthout continue doing this work!
"... the mistakes that are made by a truly revolutionary workers' movement
are, historically speaking, immeasurably more fruitful and more valuable
than the infallibility of the best possible 'Central Committee.'" - Rosa
Luxemburg, democratic socialist, Rosa Luxemburg Reader (p. 265, p. 444).
On October 18, 2015, presidential candidate Bernie Sanders decided that
Iowa
City would be where he declared what "democratic socialism" means to him. A
bit shy of a 13-point program, Sanders did cite some helpful examples of
what he considers socialist institutions: Social Security, Medicare and the
police. Interestingly, the last time I heard these institutions in the
United States referred to as socialist was when they were being attacked by
libertarians like Ron Paul and Ross Perot. Apparently the populist
independent-turned-Democrat from Vermont and the unrepentant capitalists
share the viewpoint that government institutions are inherently socialist.
I could laugh off the reactionary ravings of the right wing. But my heart
sank when I saw Sanders' statements. Empirically and historically
incorrect,
they endanger any hope for building socialism in the United States through
a
doublespeak of calling liberal institutions socialist.
It may seem nitpicky to the unfamiliar, but Sanders' politics are actually
what is commonly referred to as social democracy. Social democrats believe
that the purpose of the state is to intervene in, but not take over, the
capitalist economy in order to promote social justice. The countries that
Sanders loves to idolize - the Nordic nations - are often called social
democracies. While less broad and generous than the Nordic welfare
programs,
the United States' Social Security and Medicare programs can also be called
social democratic programs.
In fact, echoing the "Obama is a socialist" sentiments of the modern Tea
Party, opponents of Social Security in the late 1930s claimed that it was
socialism. But it is very much not. Socialism is ownership by workers of
the
means of production, or worker control of the economy. The different types
of socialism are different proposals of how to accomplish these aims, from
the "transitional programs" of Trotskyists to the autonomous collectives of
syndicalists.
Social Security, on the other hand, is intervention into the capitalist
economy. Rather than building workers' power, Social Security gives them
"social insurance" based on the very same unequal metrics - wages that
created the need for the intervention. It is like a consolation prize for
losing capitalism! President Franklin Delano Roosevelt's New Deal brought
on
a "golden age of capitalism," and is still referenced as such by the
capitalist apologists of today.
In a time when resistance by people of color against racist police is held
as the modern example of "people power," even some liberals must have been
thrown by Bernie Sanders' classification of police as socialist. But the
New
York City Police Department is described as at the "cutting edge" of
policing, and "pioneering" new ways to be more sensitive to "the
community."
Surely this "progressive" police department would demonstrate the
"socialism" Sanders says is exemplified by police. But rather than the
workers democratically controlling how policing operates, the NYPD is run
by
a strict hierarchy. There are 13 tiers, from the new officers making
$41,975
per year to NYPD Commissioner Bill Bratton's $205,180. While the department
receives $4.8 billion per year from the government, it is talked about like
a global franchise. The assertion that the police are a socialist
institution is even more preposterous when historically they have
functioned
to protect the property of the wealthy and prevent leftist uprisings by
groups like the Black Panther Party, the Young Lords and the American
Indian
Movement.
Bernie Sanders' statements are inaccurate, but is he dangerous to
socialists? Unfortunately, social democrats like Sanders have demonstrated
in the past that at crucial moments, they will side with the right wing
over
actual socialists.
It was December 30, 1918, in Berlin, and Rosa Luxemburg had enough. "Red
Rosa" had long been a firebrand in German politics: organizing sex workers,
fighting against capital punishment and war, successfully calling multiple
general strikes and writing a book on Marxist economics that both
compliments and builds on Marx's Capital. Supporting the kaiser in World
War
I and resisting the new workers' councils, the Social Democratic Party
(SDP)
of Germany had proven to be detrimental to the fight for socialism. The war
had split the socialists of the country: the SDP believing in reforming
capitalism, the Communist Party (which Luxemburg had formed after the war)
wanting to replicate a more democratic version of the Bolshevik Revolution
in Russia.
"Our solution," Luxemburg declared in a speech, "offers the only means of
saving human society from destruction." Luxemburg and her Communist Party
of
Germany threatened the Social Democratic Party with open defiance. So the
SDP ordered the Freikorps, right-wingers known as a "precursor to Nazism,"
to suppress the rebellion. Luxemburg was captured, tortured and killed.
Obviously we do not live in quite as turbulent times as Germany was in
then,
but the simultaneous rise of populism on both the left (represented by
Sanders) and the right (represented by Donald Trump), with no challenge to
capitalism itself, should at least concern American leftists.
The socialists of this country must cease pulling punches with Bernie
Sanders, often held in the hope that his candidacy is an entryway to actual
socialism. When we make such compromises, we underestimate how well Sanders
can make his social democratic ideas a dead end in capitalism, rather than
a
path to socialism. We need transitional programs like Socialist
Alternative's strategy in Seattle. That is pragmatism. There is nothing
pragmatic about the dead end of social democracy. And there is nothing
revolutionary about socialism in name only.
Copyright, Truthout. May not be reprinted without permission.
Emma Caterine
Emma is resident Marxist troublemaker and student at the CUNY School of
Law.
She has written for Autostraddle, Feministing, The Feminist Wire, RH
Reality
Check, and co-authored Red Umbrella Project's "Criminal, Victim, or
Worker?"
report on the Human Trafficking Intervention Courts.
Related Stories
Will Americans Vote for a Democratic Socialist?
By Lawrence S. Wittner, Truthout | Op-EdA Socialist Surge in the US? Bernie
Sanders Draws Record Crowds, Praises Greek Anti-Austerity Vote
By Amy Goodman, Democracy Now! | Video InterviewWhat One Historian Wishes
Bernie Sanders Said About Being a Socialist
By Bernard Weisberger, Moyers & Company | Op-Ed
Show Comments
