Views in brief

The limits of Sanders' socialism

IN RESPONSE to "What should the left say about Sanders?": I want to add to the discussion that SocialistWorker.org is having over Bernie Sanders. I'm glad that SocialistWorker.org is having this important debate among socialists.

The "political revolution" Sanders calls for is impossible in the Democratic Party. It requires a class-based party--not even a third party like the Greens--to fundamentally change the alignment; any party without a working-class basis can be dominated by the ruling class instead of workers and the oppressed.

When it comes to the involvement of socialists, we have to ask what the mass character of the campaign is, and how it is building for the long haul against capitalism. When the Sanders campaign does hold events that are open and public--town hall meetings, public forums, rallies and demonstrations--then we can and should intervene, but only with an independent message.

But most areas of participation in a standard bourgeois primary campaign--fundraising, door-knocking, phone-banking, e-mail/social media, get-out-the-vote drives--are arenas where we cannot participate. These mean calling for a vote for a bourgeois political party, and we cannot cross the class line. And they end when the primary ends.

These bureaucratic methods and the focus on individual candidates in the primary elections are anti-democratic. This is how the ruling class vets candidates; since primaries are readily won by the candidates with the most money, they can make it so the general election is a win-win for themselves by picking their candidate in the primary for each party.

Sanders would do more good by using his Senate seat and his huge mailing list to organize for independent labor/community slates in state, local and even congressional elections, rather than pouring money and effort into a presidential campaign. After all, Bernie is going to lose. That's a foregone conclusion. He knows it, and everybody in the Democratic Party knows it. He is acting as the sugar-coating on the bitter Hillary pill. A serious campaign by labor/community slates would actually change the political trajectory in the U.S.

Socialists have to be critical of Bernie for two specific things. First, his lack of serious criticism or action on the issue of police brutality at a time when the issue has been placed front and center. The house is on fire. You can't just punt on the most important issue of the moment. Second, his awful pro-Israel stance. It isn't even a one-state/two-state question; Sanders doesn't even support returning to the pre-1967 borders. Annexation of territory is a war crime.

I think we have to refrain from sectarian criticism--calling Sanders a "social democrat," etc. Our criticism should be principled and solid, and we should work with Sanders supporters, while being clear on why we don't join them in support.
Wayne R., New Jersey

What Sanders signifies

IN RESPONSE to "Bernie Sanders is no Eugene Debs": In The Revolution Betrayed, Leon Trotsky wrote, "A political struggle is, in its essence, a struggle of interests and forces, not of arguments. The quality of leadership is, of course, far from a matter of indifference for the outcome of a conflict, but it is not the only factor, and in the last analysis is not decisive. Each of the struggling camp moreover demands leaders in its own image."

He was only stating a recognized truth about social and political movements: They are about the people, not the leaders. Leaders only emerge after the movement has some nascent force, and it is the force of the movement against the forces of the status quo, not the force of their representative individuals, which change society. I trust most people who identify as socialists and read SocialistWorker.org take this to be basic theory.

Why then, are we paying so much attention to Bernie Sanders himself, rather than on what he signifies? It is easy to see that Bernie Sanders, though he professes many socialist beliefs and even identifies with the term, leaves much to be desired in comparison with the socialists of yore. No, Sanders is not Eugene Debbs.

But the fact that someone can openly call himself a socialist (remember when that word was a slur? Just 10 years ago!), advocate, through his socialism, for things many Americans can only dream of (like affordable/free health care and education), and get legitimate positive attention for it shows that the American people are unusually open to socialist ideas at this time.

This could mean any number of things, but here is an especially important consideration: There is a real opportunity now, through outreach and activism, to inject a sophisticated, robust socialism into the mainstream American political arena (perhaps facilitating or being facilitated by the founding of a Democratic Socialist Party, as another contributor suggested), which may outlast this presidential election (and therefore progress is made in a larger sense).

Bernie Sanders' presence and the attention being showered on him mean that people with "ordinary" political thought are more likely to listen to what people like us have to say. It's not about him, it's about what he signifies.
Charles, Colorado

Sanders can help lead people out

IN RESPONSE to "The ghost of liberal Democrats past": As a socialist who has never voted for either of the capitalist parties since I was old enough to vote in 1951, I do not intend to start now. Nevertheless, I agree with Bhaskar Sunkara and not Lance Selfa about the potential of the Sanders campaign for revitalizing the socialist movement.

Sanders' self-identification as a socialist is what makes this campaign different from the usual progressive primary campaigns that Selfa analyzes. While Sanders will, doubtless, deflect questions about his socialist beliefs to the issues he wants to focus on, socialists in his campaign need not be so restricted.

Furthermore, Sanders will be forced in debates and interviews to challenge Clinton's corporatism and to place alternatives to capitalist solutions into the mainstream. Of course, it would be preferable, as Selfa suggests, to organize the left into independent political action now. Unfortunately, I don't see that happening, and Selfa vastly underestimates the potential that Sanders' media exposure provides for getting anti-capitalist ideas into the mainstream.

Even the most modest success of the Sanders campaign will be to sour many "progressives" on Hillary's corporatism and to lead them out of the Democratic Party into independent political action. It is an unparalleled opportunity for socialists to come out of their closet.
Jules Greenstein, Glen Gardner, New Jersey

Hollow words from Quad

IN RESONSE to "Life has no dignity at Quad": I currently work for Quad in Chalfont, Pennsylvania. Our previous owners sold out during their third bankruptcy.

As bad as they were, Quad is worse. Our union is weak, but if we didn't have a contract when they bought us, we would have been really screwed. They have these stupid catchphrases: "Believe in People." "Do the Right Thing." "Innovate." "Trust in Trust." "Grow." "Make Money." "Have Fun." "Do Things for the Rose."

These are hollow words. I'm making less money now than I was 10 years ago. They don't want to give raises. They force you to wear uniforms with the Quad logo and to pay for the privilege. Believe me, there is no having fun working for these guys.

As far as the environmental stuff, I've never heard that here. They bought Brown Printing, with a plant nearby in East Greenville, and they really hammered them--took away vacation time and made pay cuts. I wouldn't recommend this place to anyone.
Anonymous, from the Internet