|
The two-party shell game of U.S. capitalist politics
is now in full swing, with an impressive cast of characters lining up
to support Obama, as they did with John Kerry. Some are helping to
prettify his image and others proclaiming for the umpteenth time in
history that "lesser evilism" is a viable political option.
The cast of progressives who call for a vote
for "lesser evil" Obama today—as they did for Kerry and other
liberal Democrats running against the "evil" Republicans in
the past—include Noam Chomsky, Howard Zinn, Danny Glover, Amiri Baraka,
Harry Belefonte, and a host of others.
For revolutionary socialists the issue in
capitalist elections is not program alone. Neither does it concern the
individual character or personality of candidates or the candidates
they run against. Indeed, there is but one issue that concerns us when
it comes to electoral politics. We call it class independence, or
better, working-class independence.
Behind this concept is a political principle
that has always stood at the center of revolutionary Marxism and socialist
politics. This is the view that only the working class can liberate
itself from the evils of capitalist exploitation and oppression.
"No savior from on high delivers," as the chorus to the
“Internationale,” the anthem of the world’s working class, proclaims.
The 1871 "savior" reference was to the religious variety,
Jesus Christ; today it refers to the parties and candidates of capital,
in whatever guise they come.
Political parties throughout history are
associations of individuals and groups organized to defend specific
class interests. They seek political power to best defend and advance
these interests. The Democrats and Republicans are qualitatively less
the parties of the leaders who head their tickets than the social
forces behind them. Elections pose the question as to which class will
rule society.
The decisive forces behind the Democrats and
Republicans are, without exception, the ruling rich of the U.S.,
individuals who control wealth and private property valued in the
trillions of dollars. These are the ruling-class few who control the
major banks and corporations of the country—most all of them. In
decades past they were referred to as "America’s Sixty
Families." Their number has not qualitatively increased, and their
family names are still familiar: Morgan, Rockefeller, Dupont, Geddes,
Vanderbilt, Mellon, Gould, Whitney, etc.
These, and a few score more, are the few who
select and control Congress, who rule or ruin any elected official who
believes or acts contrary to their interests. These are the few who decide on wars and assassinations,
who own and control, through an intricate series of interlocking boards
of directors, virtually all banks and corporations, not to mention the
media. These are the same few who own or control vast portions of the
natural resources of nations other than the United States.
They can choose a dullard or genius as their
presidential candidate, a movie actor or anti-Semite, a Southern bigot
turned liberal human rights advocate, or a Black man with liberal credentials
in his youth. Once in a while, they even choose one of their own, one
of the "idle rich" whose ego delights in the direct exercise
of state power for their class.
The electoral shell game or charade is
carefully orchestrated. Well over a billion dollars is spent on the
effort. It begins with the primary process, wherein each party
"selects" its candidate. The Democrats began with roughly 10,
as they did in 2004. Their well-chosen cast of players included
liberals and conservatives, women and men, Blacks and whites,
"leftists" like Kucinich, populists like Edwards, women like
Clinton, "family values" advocates, and more.
The idea is to convince a wary public that it
is their choice, that the contrasting ideas presented are important,
that at least some of the candidates have character, and that they are
tough, honest, experienced, and capable of leading the country. And
most important, the aim is to convince the vast majority that the
result would be "change," or a new "Great Society"—in
short, relief from the present misery and a path to a better future.
Socialists counter that the better life
offered by the ruling class’s periodic standard bearers cannot be
achieved in the framework of capitalism. And, in fact, all the evils
and injustices that so many recognize as a reality in today’s
world—racism, poverty, endless war, global warming, sexism, massive
attacks on health care, education, pensions, jobs, mortgage
foreclosures, and more—are inherent in the capitalist system itself.
Socialists therefore, whenever possible in
the electoral arena, and in everyday practice, pose a working-class
alternative to the rule of the minority capitalist elite. We are
advocates of real majority rule, rule by the masses themselves, through
their own institutions, in their own name and in their own interests.
We counterpose to the present system of
private ownership of the means of production and control of the
nation’s wealth, a system of democratic and collective ownership, in
which all critical decisions are made by the vast majority based on the
fulfillment of human needs as opposed to private profit, the latter
having been eliminated with the abolition of capitalism.
The state we seek to bring into being will be
a new society based on the fullest democracy in all spheres of human
endeavor, where war and poverty are no longer required to ensure
minority rule and plunder, where the full potential of everyone can and
will be realized in the framework of a world of plenty—a socialist
society free from oppression and exploitation.
Again, elections in essence pose the issue of
power, of which class shall rule, the minority capitalists or the
majority of workers and their allies among the oppressed. The historic
socialist rejection of political support of any kind to the parties and
candidates of capital is embedded in the core program and every
activity of the socialist movement.
|