#Breaking: Hickenlooper Drops Out

John Hickenlooper, former CO governor, has dropped out of the 2020 Democratic party primary.

Hickenlooper is the 2nd candidate to drop out of the primary, the first was California congressional representative Eric Swalwell, who dropped out in early July.

Hickenlooper never polled higher than 2% and his only claim to fame was getting booed of the stage of the California Democratic Party Convention for saying, “Socialism is not the answer.”

Hickenlooper unable to continue his speech after crowd rejects his idea that “Socialism is not the answer.”

Now that the facts have been presented, since this is a socialist blog, allow me to editorialize:

🎵Na Na Na Na🎵

🎵Na Na Na Na!🎵

🎵Hey Hey Hey🎵

🎵Goodbye!🎵

🎵Na Na Na Na🎵

🎵Na Na Na Na!🎵

🎵Hey Hey Hey🎵

🎵You Suck!🎵

Advertisements

Liz Warren Will Sell Us Out Faster than Obama Did

Rolling Stone recently published an article titled, “Is Liz Warren Building a Grassroots Juggernaut?”

Spoiler alert, no, no she is not.

Warren is doing nothing more than copying the election style of Obama 2008, and while it is a very successful, grassroots style of campaigning, it is far from being a juggernaut because Warren, like Obama, will not use it to mobilize her base for a working class agenda.

Why won’t she do this? Because she does not have a working class agenda.

Warren believes in Keynesian, regulated capitalism. To believe in any form of capitalism is to believe in the benevolence and ethics of the bourgeoisie, which is to be inherently anti working class. Warren likes the idea of the American working class, but she fails to understand the need for socialized, radical platforms, and therefore does not understand them beyond her own conceptions of American acceptationalism.

It is true that Warren has doubled down her support for some working class programs, such as Medicare for All at the recent debates, however to quote Game of Thrones, “Words are wind.” Her hesitancy to fully, explicitly embrace Medicare for all until recently demonstrates a hesitancy towards the platform, and anyone can say they support a policy and then retract support later (as Obama did!). Compare this to Bernie who has not only been vocal about working class programs such as medicare for all, but he has also been consistent about voting for these working class platforms.

Warren is also a failure on the international front as well. She has voiced support for Israel and has voted for every single increase in military spending under the Trump administration.

Another misgiving to have about Warren is her refusal to denounce the Third Way Democrats. The Third Way think tank is a collection of investment bankers who are intentionally trying to sabotage the growing left-wing tendency of the democratic party. Their twitter account, Third Way Tweet, has begun praising Warren as sensible and smearing Bernie as a “loser.” (My eyes just rolled so hard they popped out of my skull btw). Third Way might want to actually read Warren’s platform, because there is nothing, literally nothing she has suggested, that is nothing more than a watered down version of what Bernie put forward in 2016.

I also have to say that any one who has ever been a member of the Republican party should never be trusted. Warren was a registered republican until 1996. To support one of the most racist, anti working class parties until you’re in your 40s is bad enough, but what is worse is Warren’s justification for being a Republican.

Warren says while she was registered with the GOP that she was not “politically active” and many who support her say, “yes she was a republican but that was when she was young!” She was in her forties in 1996!

I have even heard some people say that Bernie is a nice alternative to the “old white men” running for the presidency. I would like to remind these people that Warren is 70 years old!

All in all, I do not trust Warren, which hurts because I remember the days of Occupy when she seemed to be on our side. But I am not convinced she is consistent and I think she will sell us out faster than Obama did. Obama is similar to Warren in many ways. Palatable to progressives and moderate centrists alike and with a growing base. But much like how Obama failed to mobilize his base out of a need to be “everyone’s president” so do I also see Warren following the same path.

Warren is not the sensible candidate, she is the watered down version of Bernie. I don’t know about the rest of you, but I hate it when a bar tender waters down a perfectly good drink. I’ll take a shot of Bernie, pure and straight, because that is what we need.

Is Liz Warren creating a campaign juggernaut? No, she is a flavor of the month who might sneak in a victory here and there, but even if she wins the nomination and defeats Trump you will see no activation of this base she built. We will get 4 more years of uninspired, pathetic attempts to regulate a class that already controls the regulations.

We don’t need regulated capitalism, we need to strip away the powers of capital. No candidate can bring us anything close to this but Bernie.

A Quick Note About Leftist Strategy

Strategy and ideology are equally important but when one gets put ahead of the other you run into problems.

Put ideology ahead of strategy you end up doing stupid shit like not voting or joining cultish fraud left groups. If all you care about is validating your analysis instead of thinking tactically to gain the most materially for the most people then you are not helping the left.

Put strategy ahead of ideology you end up selling out important beliefs. If all one cares about is getting socialists elected and not about holding them accountable, about laying out a socialist program for society, and building alternatives to capitalism all at the same time, one is not helping the left.

Leftists should have a strong idealogical core. They should also use that ideology to think and act as tactically as possible.

I don’t think it’s that complicated.

Don’t Just Vote for Socialists, Vote for ECO-Socialists

I am a strong supporter of the DSA’s current electoral platform, and I say that as someone who is beyond disilluisioned with electoralism. However, the DSA’s current platform for getting as many socialists as possible elected to public office has been nothing but good for the organization and for socialism.

This platform of pushing for DSA members to run for office has successfully brought socialism out from the marginalized wings of U.S. politics and into the mainstream. It has brought attention to the organization and helped force the policy platform of many otherwise moderate democrats go further to the left.

However, considering the impending disaster facing our planet, species, and existence, I move that we not only work to elect socialists, but explicit eco-socialists to office.

I don’t need to remind anyone how disastrous of a state we are in. The carbon levels in the atmosphere are at their highest in the history of humankind and too many species are already on the brink of extinction. Farmworkers are being forced to work in even more complicated conditions since we are losing consistency in our crops, and we will be seeing more mass migrations as global warming gets worse.

Therefore, we cannot, I repeat, CAN NOT, take it for granted that the socialists we seek to elect are explicitly conscious of the need for an ecological, sustainable economy. The importance of electing socialists to office allows us to seize a form of state power and push for a democratized economy, which inturn can help create a more eco-friendly one, but that will not be an inevitability if we do not make it so.

Some will say that the terms “socialist” and environmentalist are inherently intertwined because the liberals have clearly aligned themselves with the carbon economy. I disagree with this logic and say we must take nothing for granted, especially not what it means to be a socialist.

A person can identify as a socialist or as pro labor but then can flip that to mean something that is not environmentalist at all. Some have taken the stance that the environment is secondary to labor. For example the AFLCIO has released all kinds of anti envromental stances, including support for pipelines and housing developments. They take the platform of “job creation” being the priority of the working class. This stance is flawed because it blatantly ignores the reality of job creation that comes from embracing a green economy. This is why cannot take for granted that a pro working class candidate is also a pro environmental one.

Support for an eco socialist candidate should not be limitus tested by one single policy either. While I support a Green New Deal we can not rely on that alone to save ourselves. An ecosocialist candidate must incorporate the realities of mass migration, conservationism, and animal rights into their pro working class agenda.

To say that the terms socialist and environmentalist are inherently intertwined risks us losing out ecosocialist candidates in favor of ones who fail to reconcile environmentalism and socialism. We must make our demands explicit and that must reflect in our electoral platform at all times. We cannot take for granted that every socialist is an ecosocialist, I think it is pretty evident that we can take nothing for granted.

Pete Buttigieg Is Not A Genius

Many people are impressed with Pete Buttigieg’s performance during the first democratic party debate and many more are impressed with how intelligent Buttigieg appears to be. I am not one of them.

Credit where credit is due, while I disagreed with everything he said during the first 2020 presidential debate, I am objective enough to admit that he did not stumble in his responses and he did not lose any ground or footing with his base. While Kamila Harris was the clear winner in the debate and Biden the obvious loser, Buttigieg can easily be called the runner up for his cool and collective confidence throughout the night.

But here is the thing, people who applaud him are just too easily impressed by good public speaking skills and Harvard diplomas. I have met idiots with Master’s degrees, and geniuses who had dropped out of high school.

This is why I don’t give a flying fuck about Pete Buttigieg the “Rhode Scholar,” that he sells himself to be. I don’t care how many languages he speaks. I do not care that he went to Harvard, and I don’t think good public speaking and debate skills are the same as intelligence.

I am no anti intellectualist. Those who follow this blog know that! What I am is a realist, and let’s be realistic about how we as a culture treat college degrees as earmarks of status, not capability.

A Harvard diploma is not a sign of intelligence, it is a status symbol. The ability to speak another language is not a sign of intelligence, it is a skill that comes with years of memorization. Intelligence is shown in the application of ones education and knowledge. So far Buttigieg has used his alleged intelligence to protect his cities racist police force and to enable gentrification!

Our culture has a warped idea of what it means to be smart and what an education means.

Ivy leaque schools are not beacons of wisdom, they are mostly populated by trustfund legacy kids. A Harvard or Yale degree is a status symbol used to perpetuate the myth that the rich are in their class because of their “hardwork.” https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/oct/21/what-will-help-you-get-into-harvard-super-rich-parents

Now, is a person with a college degree more educated than someone without one? Certainly, but recieving an education is not a sign of intelligence by itself, true intelligence is represented in the application of your knowledge. What good is an elite education if all it is used for is personal gain? In Buttigeig’s case, what good did his diploma do to keep him from running South Bend, Indiana into the ground? Nothing.

In all honesty, a college degree is simply a symbol of training. “You studied Science for four years, so here is the piece of paper that says your qualified to talk about it!” The only difference between a diploma from Harvard and a tech school trade certification is the job opportunities that come with them. That is all any diploma is, proof that you finished your training in some subject or trade.

Pete Buttigieg is not some kind of a genius just because he has a Harvard diploma. Remember, education means nothing if you do not apply your knowledge, and considering how awful he runs the city of South Bend, I do not think he is using it. A strong debate performance is not enough to convince me otherwise. I am not that easily impressed!

Why Socialism? Because We’re All Going To Die!

Many wonder why I have moved so far left. They wonder why I have embraced the terms “socialist” and “communist.”

Now, many tell me that the word “communism” is still too stigmatizing and off putting to people who have not yet been radicalized. This maybe true, to paraphrase Nelson Madela “the oppressor inevitably has control over the tone of the dialogue.”

If this is true, and assuming that it is, then one of the roads to liberation is taking control of the dialogue, and this can only be done by embracing the terms Marxist, Socialist, and Communist, without watering them down through other terms like “liberal” or “progressive.” It should be noted that when we are not talking about Stalinism when we are using the word socialism but the association between the terms Stalinist and Communist is an annoyingly nearsighted one that is not worth addressing.

We should not shy away from the truth of our goal as leftists, which is the abolition of the capitalist state and the creation of cooperative world, free from the toxic nationalism that comes with borders and the racist, colonialist, ableist, patriarchy, which upholds capitalism.

However, there is another reason why we should not shy away from the words communism and socialism, and that is the matter of our planet’s sustainability.

It can no longer be denied that the existence of the humanity and society is dependant on us creating a ecologically sustainable economy and lifestyle. This can only happen through cooperation.

The liberal notion that laws and reforms from the top down can salvage the planet are laughable. (Side note, I am in favor of the Green New Deal, do not mistake this for sectarianism) What I mean is that simple band-aid acts such as carbon taxes or emissions limits passed by bourgeoise politicians will do nothing to alter the course of our impending demise. We have approximately one decade to salvage ourselves from a climate crisis and we cannot afford mere reformism to be our savior.

These are moments when I often think about Rosa Luxemburg’s famous line, “Our choices are socialism or barbarism.” Well, the ecological disaster in our midst is barbarism. Socialism or barbarism is not merely a call to action, but a warning. A warning that a top down, non cooperative economy and social structure will inevitably doom our species and the only alternative to that is a democratic cooperative economy. IE, socialism, communism.

The importance of a sustainable, cooperative ecological economy also ties into all issues that are important to the left. Heavy polluting factories are always put in the poorest neighborhoods. Polluted water is raising the infant mortality rate, leaving working class mothers to watch their children die. Pipelines cut through rivers and tribal lands, perpetuating the imperialist colonialism that founded the U.S.

The only way to counter how capitalism pollutes our world is with its antithesis, and the antithesis is socialism.

So when people tell me, “Communism is too dangerous of a term,” or say, “Don’t call it socialism, it’s too off putting!” I say unto them that the destruction of our species at the hands of an economy controlled by the greedy few and not the hungry masses is far more off putting than a few simple words. Words which mean cooperation and liberation I might add!

When people say that leftist language is too dangerous, I say to them what Rosa said, “Our choices are socialism or barbarism.” The barbarism is about to kill us, it is time for socialism!

Venezuela and a Blow to Neoliberalism

While we must stay attentive, I think it is safe to say that the recent coup attempts in Venezuela have been spectacular failures. For the first time in a generation, people in the United States are saying no to neoliberalism.

The difficulty that Guiado and the neoliberal opposition are facing as they try to depose Maduro and the Bolivarian government is demonstrative of the fact that neoliberalism is in its death throws. It is symbolic of a shift in our political dialogue.

Since the coups in Chile in 1972, Neoliberalism has functioned on a very simple plan of action. As Naomi Klein explains in “The Shock Doctrine” the introduction of neoliberalism into a nation’s market is dependent on one factor, crisis. In short, a national crisis “shocks” a nation’s market to its core, creating a need for that market to be refounded and rebuilt. This is where capitalists and privatizers are obligated to swoop in and “fill the void,” leading to a shift from public services to a privatized market.

Such was the case in places like Chile in 1972 or Honduras in 2012, and such was supposed to be the case in Venezuela in 2019.

No matter what your opinion is of Maduro or the Venezuelan government, it cannot be denied that U.S. intervention in Latin America has always lead to disaster, and it has always been the goal to sew crisis to allow capitalist extortion to run rampant. Ever since the success of the coup against Salvador Allende in Chile, the United States has been able to interfere and introduce neoliberalism with ease.

Usually the United States government has been able to interfere because of a lack of attention from those who oppose intervention. This has been the case in Argentina, Brazil, Ecuador, Nicaragua, Honduras and too many other nations. The fact that United States citizens are starting to resist this intervention represents a shift in the status quo for Neoliberal politics.

The failure of the coup in Venezuela is a blow to Neoliberalism itself, it is the first time in a generation that U.S. intervention has successfully been stonewalled by its own citizens, at least for now. Not since Vietnam and the fall of Saigon has free market capitalism been so humiliated.

We are by no means out of the woods, the Venezuelan embassy to the United States has been successfully evicted and Guiado is still the recognized president of Venezuela by the U.S. and several other nation’s governments, including Canada and the U.K.

However the fact that the U.S. is being challenged and is being challenged so openly by its own citizens is a blow to neoliberalism, which in my opinion is a victory for socialism. The status quo has shifted, and the chance for socialists to strike is fast approaching.