Marginalization: Another Response

This is another response to the opinion piece, "My Take on the Issue of Marginalization" by Emil Shaw contained in the August 4, 2009 edition of the Peoples' Weekly World.

For 25 odd years I've been an involved labor activist. This 25 years has included rank and file activism s well as near 20 years as a paid labor organizer and union representative. At core, my work with labor has always been grounded in a Marxist analysis and a sense that working in the working class movement represents a wider commitment to a more humane and just world.

For virtually all of my 25 years in the labor movement I've actively submerged my socialist and Marxist perspective on things. Over the years I've walked lots of miles and made a million phone calls for politicians and "coalitions" endorsed by the unions I've been involved in. I've been the soldier "carrying the water" for these organizations even though I have personally had deep doubts about the aims, intents and effectiveness of the projects and politicians I've walked for.

With all of the promises and hopes laid out there by the unions, politicians, coalitions for this and that, I've expected little and I've consistently received what I've expected. I have few illusions about many of the organizations I've served. I have never been asked about my perspective on the work I've done or campaigns I've been involved in. Within the broad labor movement I've never found or been invited to a wider discussion on the aims, goals and direction of this movement. All of my personal experience tells me that I have been serving institutions that are top-down and feudal rather than democratic and open in orientation.

If you ask me, the biggest problem we face now is the ideological and intellectual bankruptcy of the center-liberal coalition so many of us on the Left have served even as we submerge our own political perspectives and identities. Here I am talking about that broad alliance of unions, official civil rights, peace and environmental organizations, and the Democratic Party. This is that feudal, top-down alliance, and right now, this alliance has no answers and indeed seems to be drowning in its inability to rise above its own compromises.

I'm looking at it like this:

A year ago many of us were pretty excited and very active in the the 2008 election campaign, which incidentally was a campaign to elect a center-liberal President and Congress. A year ago the campaign was right on. The issues included coping with the worst recession/depression in the last 100 years, a visible end to the white mans' hegemony, a commitment to universal and accessible health care, and an end to frankly imperialist war adventures in the Middle East.

A year later, what do we have?

Dealing with the recession/depression has meant giving Wall Street continued free rein with no consequences with a secondary effort towards preserving an already woefully inadequate social safety net. Health care legislation has been negotiated away with the best ideas already vetoed by the insurance industry and hospital/health chains, and dropped by the politicians. War continues to escalate in Afganistan, Pakistan, and Iraq (even as Iraq winds down ?).

The end results are continuing growth in unemployment and poverty rates, further erosion of the public's health and well-being, escalating wars and further endorsement of the aims of U.S. imperialist policy, and a growing willingness on the part of government and media to ignore the problems and just declare that things really are better.

Meanwhile, where is this center-liberal coalition of a year ago?

The elected victors of the 2008 election are busy surrendering just about every aim put forward a year ago. There's lots here. The current health care sell out is just one example, not to mention the torture issue, immigration, molly-coddling Wall Street, constantly appeasing and appealing for "non-partisanship": you name it.

The unions are I don't know where. In the midsts of capitalist failure, rampant unemployment and falling living standards the unions are silent... Just plain silent; they have nothing to say. The European unions and Left might not have the answers, but at least they are able to say, "we're not paying for this disaster". Here, the best the unions can say is "how much?", ala' the roughly 50% concessions in big auto.

The Silver-Lining?

Emil Shaw, in his PWW opinion piece, would define the stakes of marginalization of the Left in terms of broad-active coalitions and the Left isolating itself by insisting on a pure socialism (?). The reality is that there are no "broad-active" coalitions out there... The center-liberal coalition of last autumn has shot its wad. Currently the center-liberal contingent stands by, watches, and decides whether to protest or not as each issue is surrendered away. At its most basic, this center-liberal coalition is afraid and/or unwilling to confront capital at any level. This is the current reality.

Believing that broad coalitions are a political necessity in U.S. politics, the silver lining might be this:

"Coalitions" are forming as we speak around the health care and need for public option. Acts of defiance by workers are beginning to happen (Philadelphia Museum, Bemis workers, HartMarx workers...). These "coalitions" are taking shape out of a necessity to maintain the aims and issues of the 2008 election in spite of its 2008 proponents abandoning the cause.

Recent grass roots activity around single payer and public option health care points to a possibly new phenomena... A new "left-front" to the left of the Democrats and Obama. This new "left front" (my term entirely) is highly skeptical of corporate hegemoney and free-market religion. It's too early to tell, but maybe its not so much about marginalizing ourselves. Maybe it has more to do with which "coalitions"?