Episode Transcript
Speaker 0 00:00:03 This is part two of conversation between a rock alarm or all and myself to flex. In part one, we began to talk about the takeaways from our podcast. So far, we've talked about the strategies of rising groups like justice Democrats, sunrise, DSA, and others to challenge establishment Democrats in primary races. And then we went on to talk about the need for the rising generation of progressives to claim their identities. As Democrats build the party at the grassroots run for office at every level challenge, the corporate lobbies,
Speaker 1 00:00:49 I think justice Democrats, at least on that electoral piece is really starting to build the scaffolding that the progressive caucus wasn't able to do in the past. And that's exciting. Um, but other organizations like sunrise, um, they, don't only, they're not only interested in primary and bad Democrats. They've also been very important for defending good Democrats. Um, uh, right. So it's it, but it's still in, you know, in similar to these other folks there, they are focused on, you know, whether it's the us Senate or the U S house, um, you know, and then on a state level, uh, where there's, where there's good organization, there's, there's this kind of effort happening in terms of the state legislatures, but these are all interventions to help shape who the party in government is for the Democrats. And, and I think something you said is so important that you can think about that same work as inside the democratic party or outside of the democratic party.
Speaker 1 00:01:50 And I feel like that self-conception makes a huge difference in my mind, that's all inside the democratic party work. Sure. You know, the fight over who, who are going to be the elected Democrats is inside the party. And it's just as legitimate for AOC to be out there campaigning for particular Democrats as it is for, you know, I don't know who, whoever else Obama to be out, trying to, um, put his thumb on the scale to support certain Democrats. So this is like that's life inside of a grown-up political party. Um, and it's fine. Uh, so, but there's still so much. And when you start to look at organizations like the WFP and sort of modern DSA, as I think David really articulately David <inaudible> David du holiday, that there is, there is this other kind of politics there that's like we're is convinced that they're building something that is not the democratic party, this outside of the democratic party, and really it isn't.
Speaker 1 00:02:51 Uh, and, and so to me, the next step, the step two, after you're figuring out how to intervene in primaries or in Canada, is to also think about the tens of thousands of elected positions in the United States, thousands just here in California, literally thousands of positions that are elected without any party primary, where, where people are just elected first past the post, um, in, you know, to single member districts of city councils, county boards of supervisors, you know, waterboard school boards, all of this. And, and that's where, um, the decision of whether you're going to organize as the Democrats or progressive Democrats, or as greens or as independence, or as people for good neighborhood puppies and kittens really makes a difference for what kind of power you're building, what kind of institution you're building for the long run. Um, and it's where I like, you know, for example, I think the work that we've done here in Santa Barbara, where we invested a lot of energy in making the democratic party, the progressive platform to vet candidates and generate candidates and hold elected officials accountable is, uh, is like a really powerful model. Um, and, and when you self conceptualize yourself as something other than Democrats, you leave all of that, those possibilities behind.
Speaker 0 00:04:27 Yeah. I mean, I think that, uh, I don't know, you know, more than me about this long history, but it was part of the capital Pete progressive movement of the early 20th century to have non-partisan electoral, uh, processes and at the local level in California. Um, and I don't think the Republicans, when in my experience ever, ever were nonpartisan in local elections, they were always trying to, uh, throw their weight around. So the emergence in, in our county under your, uh, influence and leadership, uh, was to, as you said, build, building a process in which that the party could endorse candidates for these putatively non-partisan races. And many of those people who did get elected that way have gone on, you know, they, they become part of the, uh, stable of progressive, uh, oriented candidates, environmentally oriented candidates, not only locally, but moving on into, uh, the state legislature and so forth. And meanwhile, the, you know, there's certainly clarity in this county that these races involve, uh, you know, party style differences, ideological differences that matter. Um, so what you're saying almost is like a call to people there's thousands of offices that, uh, can be, uh, entered into not just for your own political advancement, but as part of a, of this larger dynamic of civic engagement, progressive civic engagement that we are, I think seeing right now, uh, and, and are trying to document in our, in our conversation, um,
Speaker 1 00:06:19 Yeah. Run for something, but run for something as part of something. Yeah.
Speaker 0 00:06:24 I mean, think of yourself. Yeah. And build that something, if it's not there already in the area that you're there. Um, and so the idea that people will do good by simply running for office was never very rational because nothing can happen in politics by individual action alone. But, um, now there's maybe more potential than there's been for collective locally based collective, uh, organization that connects with, uh, things that are happening nationally as well. Let me just add one point on this, about the national impact of the progressive, uh, process we've been talking about. Uh, there's probably a number of reasons why the Biden administration has endorsed essentially a new deal agenda in policy terms, not just the green new deal, but a FDR type new deal, uh, agenda, uh, much more so than I think people would have predicted, you know, a year ago or more, uh, as, as the, uh, as, as the, as the agenda of the democratic administration.
Speaker 0 00:07:36 But part of that certainly has to do with the rise of the progressive side of things in Congress and, you know, and the Sanders Warren type efforts feeding into it, and people who, uh, Warren and Sanders supported for government office had been appointed to those offices. The, the media keep noticing now the power of the progressive wing of the party already. And that's only the last three or four months that you could even imagine that that would be the case. I think I don't want to overdramatize that because there are many barriers and pitfalls that we're going to face, but, you know, I like to think that some of what we advocate is actually being validated by it's happening. Absolutely. So we've periodically in our conversations with ourselves and with others raised though, the California story as a further problem, not just a good news story, the good news is how the democratic party is now the absolutely dominant governing party statewide in terms of, you know, Steitz in the legislature, uh, statewide.
Speaker 0 00:08:56 And, um, the Republican party still has strength in certain regions of the state, but, um, is, is very much, uh, very badly weakened compare to any history. In fact, independent registrations considerably greater than Republican party registration in California, right. They're the third party, they're the third party. So, um, however, uh, we've talked and we talked to Monique, Limone our state Senator from Santa Barbara, uh, rising figure in the state legislature, uh, about the problem of what gets to be called corporate Democrats in office, uh, in the absence of Republican party, it, it appears that corporate lobbies, uh, have decided they should invest in the democratic party. And some of the considerable number of people in the legislature were Democrats and nevertheless, uh, are allied with such corporate lobbies, whether they're the, the fossil fuel oil industry in certain areas, the ag big agriculture real estate, uh, lobby. Um, and, uh, this means that simply winning the electoral battle for, in the name of the party is only step one or step two in, in the, in the underpants search. There's, there's the fact that we live in a, um, a class structured society with class-based power relations that are not simply done away with, by, uh, electing Democrats to say the least.
Speaker 1 00:10:41 Yeah. And, uh, and, uh, and a racist society and a sexist one. Okay. Yeah, absolutely. I think that's a great framing in that, you know, California demonstrates the limits of an only partisan perspective exactly. As you said, if the goal of politics is to elect more people who are members of affiliated with registered with the democratic party, then we've like done most of our job in California. Um, some still some work to do at the local level. Uh, but we've, you know, taken over the entire state legislature with super majorities and control every statewide elected office. So, you know, why, why even bother doing anything, but, but exactly as you say, like the, the politics of left and right, the politics of the environment versus, uh, greed, the politics of, um, uh, you know, of, of criminal justice reform versus, uh, you know, a lack of police accountability, functionally, those, those fights happen within the democratic party.
Speaker 1 00:11:49 And so in van, it becomes of like, where do the fights happen, or where are the levers for moving the left side, the progressive side of those fights and in California, and this is not typical, but in California, the party itself makes endorsements in every kind of election. And this is important because the party also in California, doesn't control a ballot line in any kind of election. And what I mean by that is that whether it's a top two election for the governor. So if the top two vote getters for the governor are both Republicans, then we vote in the general election between two Republicans or two Democrats. And that's true of everything from the legislative level up. And then everything from the county level and down is all nominally non-partisan. So, you know, anybody can run and say, they're a Democrat or say they're a Republican and have whatever politics.
Speaker 1 00:12:54 Um, so, but what the party is allowed to do in California, that it isn't allowed to do everywhere is to say that a candidate in one of those races is officially supported by the democratic party. And while that endorsement doesn't mean you automatically win, it doesn't mean you automatically are the best or any of those things. It does matter. I mean, it does political scientists, Seth Masket and others have shown that it is a, an independently powerful endorsement. Um, and so that's a point of leverage for activists to be like, let's make sure that the party endorses Progressive's not only for office, but progressive positions in the all-important statewide ballot measures and local propositions that we have all of that gives a role for the party structure, the formal mechanisms for making those endorsements, that don't exist everywhere. Um, and that's where a fight can happen about whether the party is going to be on the side of a corporate Democrat or progressive Democrat.
Speaker 1 00:14:00 And then in addition to that, of course, there's the platform and resolutions and official positions of the democratic party, uh, in California, um, that in theory, right, our candidates are supposed to support. And I would say if there's a mistake that we've been making on the left in California for a while, I think it's been, you know, emphasizing the fights over the, the platform and the resolutions in those official positions and not emphasizing the, having more power and influence over those endorsement fights. Um, and, uh, and then backing up the endorsements when we win them four, Progressive's backing them up with effective campaign plans that can actually, um, you know, when the general election. So it is an interesting case study in that it's both a more grassroots controlled party in some senses than in other states, but it is a structurally and legally very weak party. I'm not controlling the nomination process for the general election in really any of the electoral level. Yeah. And I
Speaker 0 00:15:09 Don't know that we know, uh, uh, enough, uh, I mean, you and me per se, but also anyone who wants to be activist about, uh, how power can be, uh, you know, what, what resources are needed to win some of these battles. I'm thinking that there are cases they probably need much more study. For example, the corporate agenda around charter schooling, I would say a few years ago that looked very powerful. Well, the teacher's union really did mobilize effectively and they, um, uh, you know, there's a whole story there that might really be very instructive to study, not only in this case of, of, uh, educational policy, but more broadly, how was a corporate agenda, um, overcome maybe not forever, but certainly significantly, uh, um, by organizing by the unions teachers' union efforts, connecting with parent groups, uh, I'm not sure I can even put together how it worked, but, um, included an electoral strategy, getting the right people in, in
Speaker 1 00:16:23 State putting an electoral strategy. And it also including an internal democratic party strategy of fighting and making sure within all of the democratic party structures, that charter school support is a problem. And that that's, that's a, a Renegade position, so to speak. And that kind of, you know, that's a really good example. I think of why working to move the consensus of the democratic party to the left is worthwhile because it's, it's, it has really disempowered the pro charter school movement, um, in California. Uh, not obviously it hasn't completely eliminated it, but where nationally the charter school industry was really looking to California, as you know, it's, it's Vanguard, um, and had a lot of support from Democrats, uh, at the national level, including, you know, Obama and his administration. So it, it, the fact that, um, in, in, in places like Sacramento, this came to a head in fights between Democrats at the city level, at the local level. Um, I think would be a great, that'd be a really great story for someone to get in and, and, and really tell in a, in a blow by blow way. So,
Speaker 0 00:17:41 Uh, that's one example and it's, uh, but maybe right now, one of the deeply problematic has to do with, um, the housing crisis. Uh, and, um, that's also within the, you know, the real estate lobby, so to speak has been always, uh, historically allied with the democratic party. Uh, not, it's not a new factor. Um, and I think what we both agree on, but maybe don't know how it would work in detail is the party itself could be a framework for a hashing out, fighting out, uh, what the appropriate, uh, egalitarian housing program should be. The current, um, tendency is to think that incentives, uh, have to be provided to the private developer, um, class to, uh, enable them to build quote unquote, affordable housing. And largely that's probably a, a mythical, uh, that it's not a hypothesis that can be, that will bear fruit, um, about how to create the housing that's needed.
Speaker 0 00:19:06 We need social housing, we need sub subsidized housing. We need publicly, uh, supported housing. We need co-op housing, uh, and that, and how to create that remains unknown, you know, in terms of actual legislation. Yeah, not to mention, we've made some progress in tenant rights and tenant ends and at least emergency, uh, measures that support tenant needs. We'll see where that goes. But, um, you know, one of my things I've been saying, but I don't know quite how to implement it is maybe the party is conserve as a, um, space within which inter party policy debates can actually happen. Uh, and, and arriving then at a, um, outcome that, uh, would be then as you, as in the case of charter schools, a way of influencing the direction of what happens. Yeah. Um, but I mean, it's, uh, and there are probably a bunch of issues that are the visions between the labor movement and environmentalist. Uh, always that tension is remains a, an important part of the dynamic. I agree.
Speaker 1 00:20:19 I would say, you know, there's a missing opportunity with the democratic party. Part of the tragedy of the Democrat party is that if you go to a party convention or a county party picnic, you know, and in any of these gatherings of the official membership activist membership of the democratic party, just as you say, you're going to see, you know, very committed standing next to officials and activists from, you know, building trades, unions, standing next to people from public sector unions teachers. Um, and, and, you know, although it often reflects this, the segregation of, of, uh, the community, the party also reflects the diversity of the community and the democratic base. And so, um, there's no political spaces, voluntary political spaces I've ever been in the United States that have been as diverse and representative as the democratic party, certainly not environmentalist ones or DSA or any of the other kinds of groups.
Speaker 1 00:21:25 Um, so there's this opportunity for dialogue debate discussion, um, cross-fertilization and, um, you have thousands of elected officials across California that are members of the democratic party, um, and only the most rudimentary forms of communication between them about policy. So there's this whole set of opportunities that, um, for yeah. Policy debate and discussion per se, just for their own sake, um, that we don't take up. And I, and I agree that the difficult thing of course, in American politics is how do you translate the results of those discussions into actual policy? If we were in, uh, a country with a, with a parliamentary system and, uh, you know, I'd say a more rational electoral system, right? The, that line is very clear. The party gets together, they come up with a platform, a program, then they pick some candidates to go into the field running on that platform.
Speaker 1 00:22:24 And if they get elected, that's the platform they'll try to implement I'm oversimplifying, but more or less, that's the system here in the U S it's not that, um, we, the party comes up with a platform then people self-nominate and go and run for offices and win. And if they want to, they could look at the platform. So I would say to start to get to that a little summary of what's in that missing piece of the, of the, uh, underpants gnomes philosophy, that missing piece for, for the left in the United States has to be simultaneously building the democratic party as its own thing with its own power in American politics while moving the politics of that party to the left. And, and I think the why we should do that is that a politics that's completely, uh, dependent on individuals getting elected and being righteous and being good is always a politics of, uh, of, of division.
Speaker 1 00:23:28 It's a politics of individual agendas. It's a politics of transactional deal-making, um, even at, at its best. If you read, you know, great histories of periods of good progressive change in the United States, the role of individually, the powerful individual politician is her really ambivalent one. And what we should be as a left, trying to do is make American politics more issue based, more political, more rational, more collective by replacing this system of all powerful politicians, putting together the coalition they want after the fact one, in which we build an organization that can have a set of policy goals, can recruit candidates based on those policy goals, go out to the electorate and elect those candidates based on those policy goals. And then if the elected official doesn't follow those policy goals, then in the next election, they'll go and find somebody else that, that building, that kind of operation, whether it's in your medium sized college town, uh, in the middle of Pennsylvania or a beach resort community full of class struggle like here in Santa Barbara or south central Los Angeles, like wherever you are, I think figuring out how to make those things happen.
Speaker 1 00:24:53 Um, you know, inside and as Democrats is that missing piece of our strategy. Um, and I think DSA has absolutely a huge role to play and could do that as part of its activism, sunrise, the WFP justice Democrat. Like we can all play a role in building that while also doing the other things, um, advancing the other, you know, policy priorities or, um, or, or influencing the debate or moving the Overton window. Um, um, however, we feel like, uh, is important for our constituencies, but the common work should be about, you know, being the party we want to see in the world, making the democratic party into a people's party, meaning a party that elects people and hold those people accountable collectively. And that the downside of that, so to speak for, for progressives is that it means not having the sort of security or purity of being in a perfect organization.
Speaker 1 00:25:59 It means taking that leap to be the saying like, Hey, I'm a Democrat. And yes, that means that I'm in the same organization as Nancy Pelosi and, you know, Barack Obama or bill Clinton or whoever your Shibboleth is of like a bad Democrat. Um, but it, it also means being in the same organization as Fannie Lou Hamer and, uh, and Michael Harrington and, you know, and probably more importantly like millions and millions of regular people in this country who identify the democratic party with the, the new deal and the civil rights movement. And that's where we should be.
Speaker 0 00:26:36 That's a beautiful, uh, summative, uh, sermon. Sorry,
Speaker 1 00:26:41 I didn't mean to get up on a soapbox Scott on a little roll. No, no, it's good.
Speaker 0 00:26:45 I mean, we're looking at looking at w w how to bring something to a conclusion. So, so, uh, if you feel you, the listener, um, that there are loose ends, that's not a very hard thing to feel. Uh, we, we don't claim to have, uh, in, in the, in the weeks that we've been doing this, uh, found, uh, the full answer, but we hope that, I mean, I think our goal from the beginning has been to engage people in thinking through these matters in a strategic fashion, not just what's morally seems right or wrong, or what fits your ideological preconceptions, uh, but, uh, you know, what, what we need to be able to get from here to there from wanting those underpants and controlling them. Um, and, and, um, this is only season one, you know, we we've got years ahead of us. Right. And do
Speaker 1 00:27:48 You want to tease up season two for the listeners,
Speaker 0 00:27:52 You and I have discussed that we both have some ideas about quote unquote socialism. That might be a good framing for what we want to do in season two. Uh, and let's put it this way. Strategy remains are one of our goals thinking strategically. Uh, and from that point of view, uh, examining, uh, the current meanings of what the word socialism means, I have to, um, I mean, I would say this, that the new left that I was part of in the sixties, we abandoned the term. And that would be one thing I'd like to talk about why that happened and what does it mean that the term has been so revived and that the democratic socialists of America have become, you know, then they're honing in on a hundred thousand members, no socialist groups had that size for generations in this country. That's fascinating.
Speaker 0 00:28:54 So that, that's probably right. That's what you have in mind. Absolutely. Sounds fun next season. Yeah. Um, but meanwhile, we're not hearing enough from people who have been listening, uh, and, um, I hope that we can get some feedback, not only good job guys, but more importantly, uh, taking on some of our points, uh, raising questions that we haven't raised challenging some of what we've done. We'd love to get that kind of response from people. Uh, we have a Facebook page talking strategy, making history, Facebook page, which might be a good place for comments to be put
Speaker 1 00:29:35 In. If there's a particular question or a, uh, an angle that we didn't hit, that you'd like us to engage with. Yeah. Feel free to, to give us some feedback. Um, we'd love for this to be a dialogue people
Speaker 0 00:29:47 That we should be talking to. And there are people who are listening who think they should be on the show. We'll let us know if you think that
Speaker 1 00:29:55 Yes. And probably people out there you think should hear this show. So feel free to share the podcast with others. What is the thing I'm supposed to say now? Um, every time I talk to another human being like hit, like, and subscribe, um, this is the new normal, um, but, uh, it's been a pleasure, uh, getting into the weeds on the democratic party this season, looking forward to talking about socialism and its discontents next season. Thanks so much, Dick. Thanks. <inaudible>
Speaker 0 00:30:22 For educating me, uh, and, uh, our listeners and for your persistent determination to create the people's party.
Speaker 2 00:30:33 Hey, all right. Sounds good. <inaudible>.
