Why I Signed the “Dump Trump, then Battle Biden” Open Letter

Louis Proyect expresses surprise at several of the signatures, including mine, that are affixed to the “Dump Trump, then Battle Biden” open letter.

            Speaking just for myself, I share his surprise, and I also share his disgust at the figure of Joe Biden. I surprised myself, because the position of advocating a lesser-evil vote – not for myself in Massachusetts, but for those in “battleground” states – is one that I would not ordinarily take. But this is not an ordinary moment, and the allowance for this kind of exception finds strong precedents, including in the strategic thinking of Marx.

            Discussing the January 1849 elections to the Prussian Constituent Assembly, Marx distinguished between the movement’s electoral tactics and its longer-range organizing: “Where it is a struggle against the existing government [the Prussian monarchy], we ally ourselves even with our enemies.… Now, after the election, we again affirm our old relentless standpoint not only against the government but also against the official opposition.”[1]

            The “existing government” in 1849 Prussia corresponds to the prospective regime that can be anticipated in the event of Trump’s continuation in power. The choice, in other words, is not just between two sets of policies or personalities; it’s between two different regimes.

Philly SAVE OUR POSTAL SERVICE Rally. Photo by Joe Piette

            The Trump-led coup d’état is already in process, with his sabotage of the Postal Service, his equivocation about accepting the electoral outcome (implying that the election will not be “fair” if all votes are counted), and his portrayal of the Democrats as embodying a scenario of disorder and the specter of socialism.

            At this point, no one knows what the outcome will be, but the consummation of the coup could take various forms, including Republican state legislatures declaring DP majorities in their respective states null & void, and then installing an alternate slate of Electors, and/or seeing an inconclusive Electoral College outcome thrown into the House of Representatives, where, under the 12th Amendment to the US Constitution, each state, regardless of its population-size, would have only a single vote (which would give the Republicans a majority).

            The surest defense against such scenarios is an overwhelming Electoral College victory for the Democrats.

            We live in a period of emergency. I don’t need to underline here what a second Trump term would bring (“off the charts,” in the words of the Open Letter). I have no illusions about Biden; that’s why we say that he will have to be resisted from the get-go. I also realize that the fascist forces embodied by Trump will not disappear. But the space for continuing our work – of not only resisting the policies of capital, but also building toward a socialist alternative – will be significantly less constricted if Trump can be pushed out of the way.


[1] Neue Rheinische Zeitung, 18 Feb. 1849 (Marx’s emphasis); see full discussion in Chapter 8 of my book Socialist Practice: Histories and Theories (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2020); original version in Socialism and Democracy. vol. 24, no. 3 (2010).

Looking Back at the Primaries

What is the legacy of the Sanders insurgency? What is the state of left organization? Are we closer to a proto-workers party?

JWL: The Sanders campaign accomplished two historical achievements that progressive activists can build on going forward. First, the campaign united millions of mostly working-class Americans behind a progressive universalist political vision. Second, the campaign organized these working people to implement a concrete political strategy to compete for power with the capitalist ruling class.  By raising several hundred million dollars from small-dollar donations and organizing millions of working people, the campaign created the organizational capacity of working people to possibly elect a government that actually governs in their interest. The two-party political system in which the moneyed elite dominate both parties has a good-cop/bad-cop dynamic which limits the realm of political possibility in the U.S. The Sanders campaign developed an independent working-class organization within this two-party system that appeared to be building a viable strategy to break the capitalist lock on political power.  This surge in working-class organizational capacity frightened both the Democratic Party elites and the corporate media as seen by the hysterical reaction following Sanders’ win in Nevada.

The goal of socialists is to create the institutional capacity of the “99%” to act in unison for a politics based in universal solidarity. That is traditionally done in a political party but the two-party system in the U.S. has successfully prevented a mass working-class party from organizing in the U.S.  Moreover, capitalism institutionalizes many forms of oppression to divide and conquer the majority.  As a result of this dynamic of being locked out of party politics and the multiplicity of capitalist oppressions, the Left in the U.S. is traditionally fragmented, organized into relatively small issue-oriented pressure groups that occasionally work together in coalitions. In five years, the Sanders movement changed the realm of possibility in the U.S. moving towards creating a politics based in universal solidarity.  Universalist policies such as the Green New Deal, Medicare for All, and cradle-to-grave free education are now endorsed by strong majorities in the Democratic Party.

The Sanders campaign fell short of the Democratic Party nomination because many people concluded that Bernie Sanders was not “electable.”  In essence, this group decided that the movement behind Bernie was not powerful enough to break with the corporate wing of the Democratic Party and still beat Donald Trump.  To project that type of power, the movement needs to make the organizing and fundraising that occurred in the Sanders campaign permanent. That is, we need a national proto party which can work inside and outside the Democratic Party on both the street and in party politics in order to build the unified working-class super-majority with the capacity to take power.  Moreover, the movement needs to develop an institutional democratic process and commitment to work through the real differences within our movement. The success of the Sanders campaign and the quick growth of organizations such as Democratic Socialists of America and Our Revolution suggests this strategy is viable.

2. One of the remarkable achievements of the Sanders campaign was the building–at least for the primary campaign purposes–of a truly diverse, rainbow-like, working-class coalition that included the black left, community-based Latinx organizations, several union leaders, etc. Many groups traditionally identified with “identity politics” came on board. For moments, it seemed prefigurative of a diverse, multiracial, working-class party. Of course, there is a long road to be traveled here but what would need to happen to bring these forces together beyond a primary campaign? What kind of dialogue is needed among these groups to develop a minimum program and even a shared narrative?

JWL: Capitalism has organized the entire global political economy around the short-term profits of very few elites. These profits are based upon the exploitation, dispossession, and exclusion of a vast majority of humanity. How does the small minority of ultrarich maintain its power? They have monopolized control of the capacity to organize mass organizations for governance and violence (states) and production (corporations). In addition, through a laundry list of strategies, they divide and conquer the majority. For example, there is a long history of imperialist powers recruiting the poor of one region into armies to go conquer the poor in another region and in the context of war many of the soldiers adopt the perspective of the oppressor.

There is also a long history of ordinary people organizing diverse coalitions to win liberating demands. U.S. history is full of examples of different movements (e.g., labor, civil rights, gay rights, antiwar, etc.) working together and inspiring each other to expand the realm of freedom and democracy. The link between these movements was often socialist or anarchist groups.

The Sanders campaign demonstrates that working people can come together around a platform based on universalist values that address both generalized (e.g., global warming, nuclear war, labor exploitation) and specific (environmental racism in a specific locality) manifestations of capitalist oppression. The campaign had a clear narrative of us versus the capitalist oligarchs. Over ten million people donated money, organized, and voted for the purpose of electing Sanders. Can the next step be taken to turn a political campaign into a permanent organizing effort? I do not know but that needs to be our goal. A functioning mass proto-party which can organize inside and outside the Democratic Party, grounded in grassroots activist organizations would go a long way towards inspiring worker solidarity and confidence. Organizations such as Our Revolution and Democratic Socialist of America are making efforts to that end, but their membership make up a small percentage of the progressive working class. 

There are real differences on the Left regarding vision, strategy, and tactics. The movement needs an institutional home to create a democratic forum to work through these differences. Moreover, a lot of work needs to be done to create a democratic theory and practice to doing democracy to scale. Movement democracy in which a lot of little groups periodically cooperate does not create the unity necessary to inspire working-class collective confidence to take action to displace the capitalists from power. On the other hand, the Left also has a tradition of organizing large scale bureaucratic institutions that devolve into totalitarianism. The working class needs an institutional home in which it can consciously work to create a mass inclusive democratic process and act in solidarity. The proto-party needs to consciously create an inclusive process in which the most disenfranchised take leading roles in decision-making. The Sanders campaign suggest such an institution is possible.

3. As we consider the trajectory of the campaign, especially the confused conversation about alleged “moderates” and/or “centrists,” what will a future left formation have to do to bring in the upper strata of the working class? I am thinking especially about suburban white women, the more progressive of whom seem to have been decisive, with African American middle class-led organizations, in turning the tide against Sanders and for Biden.

JWL: A functional mass proto-party could potentially change the distribution of power in the U.S. which would change people’s assessment of what is possible. If working people can run many viable electoral campaigns without the support of capitalists, working people will be less fearful of alienating the corporate elite of the Democratic Party. For example, if we elected ten or twenty more outspoken young progressive women of color in the Congress like the Squad, Medicare-for-All and the Green New Deal will seem more possible. If a proto-party could back up a strike against a large corporation like Walmart with an effective boycott, it will change working people’s sense of their own power. In addition, a national institutionalized democratic forum in the context of the proto-party could facilitate cross-class multiracial dialogs about issues hopeful developing a consensus not only about demands but strategy and tactics.

4. The easy question: What is the road forward? (I am looking for some granularity here, particularly about organizing and political formations – to surface the premise – the road forward for leftists who wish to build on the achievements of the Sanders campaign and also defeat Trump).

JWL: The immediate task is to defeat Trump. This is an imperative task. As is plainly evident in the Coronavirus pandemic, Trump and the Republican Party are an existential threat to democracy and humanity. In addition, the actions of the Trump administration have greatly increased the likelihood of both run-away global warming and nuclear war.

I think it would be a catastrophic mistake for progressives to sit out the presidential race because we do not like the Corporate Democrat, Biden. The election of Biden would create openings for pressure politics to be successful in the coming years. If the Sanders campaign activist network stays functional working to elect Biden by raising money and organizing independently but in coordination with the Biden campaign, progressives could build power through the campaign. The independent campaign could explicitly endorse Biden as a tactic to open the opportunity for a pressure campaign for the Sanders platform during and after the election. By staying active and organized, progressives also put pressure on the Biden campaign to heed their concerns. In the context of the coronavirus, this strategy is contingent on the Biden campaign endorsing policies that will concretely address the needs of working people. If the Biden campaign proposes an austerity neoliberal budget in a time of economic depression, the Democrats cannot win.   

The exuberance generated by ousting Trump and the pent-up anger from the Trumps’ coronavirus pandemic and economic depression catastrophe could generate a wave of organizing. A functional organizing institution such as the Sanders campaign could potentially serve as a democratic forum to guide that organizing and be a prefiguration for a working-class proto-party. Implemented with integrity, such a strategy would also inspire confidence of the working class. It would demonstrate the capacity to implement a multi-stepped strategy to contest for power. A Biden win powered by progressive organizing will open opportunities for going on the offensive to build working-class power.

Challenges facing the US Left

From the Editors, July 2020

There is no revolution without crisis. But crisis does not necessarily lead to revolution.

Over the last months, diverse movements, rallying under the banner #BlackLivesMatter, outraged by repression and exhausted by forced isolation, have stood up to militarized cops in every U.S. state, knowing that doing so risks horrific outcomes—losing an eye to a rubber bullet or gas canister, contracting the coronavirus, even death. And yet these protests have spread globally, with massive demonstrations in dozens of cities over five continents.

This is a time for guarded optimism and bold mobilization. Caught in the moment of rebellion but constrained by a deadly pandemic as well as by the limits of present Left political capacities, we ask, How should socialists respond to these re-emerging social movements?  In what spirit should we engage the unfolding debates and contests on the streets and in the voting booths?

Four strategic considerations stand out: (1) the need for coordinated mass organization; (2) new opportunities for synthesis around race and class; (3) the exposed weakness of capitalist state institutions and ideology; and (4) the fundamentally international character of the crisis.

(1) The unprecedented street rebellions against both the symbolic and coercive instruments of power outstrip the organizational capacity of movements historically active on these issues. What forms can unite this movement?

While many of these mobilizations have united around the Movement for Black Lives, the absence of any overarching national organization to connect and coordinate let alone encompass the rebellion is disturbing but by no means surprising. Within the USA, anti-capitalist and anti-racist organizations with the vision and the vigor to lead in this way—from the CPUSA of the 1930s to the Black Panther Party of the 1960s—have been relentlessly attacked by the U.S. ruling class.  The sweeping character of the present uprising suggests the possibility for new leaps, but these gains must be organized, the lessons clarified and generalized.  For the situation is multifaceted, and enemy forces are at work to undermine and co-opt the movement.  Privately-owned, for-profit national media have amplified and framed the rebellion for their own purposes, while (neo)liberal politicians and corporations fasten upon a tightly circumscribed “anti-racism” to shore up their images and market shares.

        (2) This “state of emergency” has exposed underlying social cleavages, creating an opportunity to connect longstanding grievances about racism and police violence to class realities through the lens of the mishandled COVID pandemic—which as of this writing has led to the preventable deaths of over 150,000 people in the USA, disproportionately poor, working-class, Black, and Brown.

Questions of racial inequity are increasingly understood as class questions as the concrete circumstances of age, geography, occupation, comorbidities, and healthcare access further worsen the longstanding vulnerability of indigenous, Black, and Latinx communities. This recognition has yielded principled and material grounds forchallenging the co-ruling parties of capital and white supremacy.  In short, it is becoming clearer than ever that “race” inflects class position, conditioning access to the things people need to live: healthcare, food, shelter, clean water and air—none of them safe from capitalist predation.

Socialists need to support and construct initiatives that reach across ethnicities and race lines within the broad working classes—including relatively privileged layers among the professions and the so-called “middle class.” Such initiatives and network-building can support the street rebellion without ignoring the crucial electoral contests ahead. Expanded voter registration and turnout, especially among working-class, indigenous, Latinx, and Black neighborhoods, can exert popular pressure on the political process, opening terrain more favorable to the Left.

While neither ignoring nor fixating on the elections, working-class and cross-racial Left formations should deepen their ties to organized groups across the country, listen to and learn from the “essential workers” on the front lines, and fortify the extant trade union movement—particularly in public institutions, where unions often remain a significant force.

No less crucial is building the solidarity economy with its alternative institutions that directly satisfy a wide range of needs, starting with housing and food and extending to reproductive health, art, and culture. Across the globe, such initiatives are reinventing democracy and building the capacity of ordinary people for local self-organization. A socialist net must be woven and wielded to bring the ruling class down from their perch of power while shielding the working classes and oppressed from the brunt of the pandemic.

(3) We need to strategically navigate the multi-layered response of the state and of capital, exposing their spectacular repressive power and their austerity-driven refusal to address the population’s needs.  At the same time, it would be a mistake either to conflate such brutality with state power itself or to underestimate the capitalist state’s capacity to respond creatively to some dimensions of the crisis.  The ruling class remains able to co-opt and absorb popular energies, partly through symbolic concessions (e.g., retiring offensive public monuments) and partly through economic benefits and even structural reforms that may be necessary if U.S. capital is to survive a new era of disillusion and inter-imperialist competition.

(4) We should recognize that the pandemic arose, predictably, from ecological/economic global crises inherent to transnational capitalism whose long-time damages will exceed COVID-19 and killer cops combined. Both COVID and rising state repression transcend national frontiers, reminding us that socialism is a project not just to capture or resist one’s own nation-state but to liberate all of humanity at a moment when our very survival is in question. The same system of inequality that prioritizes border control and repression over public health and education weaponizes human rights and corrodes our planetary home itself, erecting walls to hold back populations even as the floodwaters continue to rise.  And, as global public health experts have been warning for years, COVID-19 may be the harbinger of worse pandemics to come.

Taken together, these four vital considerations—the need for mass organization; the deep links between race and class; the need for a strategy to link struggles on many fronts; and the imperative of internationalism—point us toward an open, inclusive, and global convergence of  oppressed communities, the broad working class, and the Left, one that is attentive to struggles to build alternatives both within and outside the existing state, to the ballot box as well as to the street.

Socialism and Democracy’s mission aligns with and seeks to contribute to such a strategic convergence—a renewed socialist movement, united across its diversity. Facing such enormous challenges, Socialism and Democracy considers it more important than ever to engage in theoretical work that “brings together the worlds of scholarship and activism, theory and practice, to generate informed analyses of the many different approaches to bringing about fundamental change.”Insofar as the meaning of modern life for many people remains deeply bound up with ethnicity and racism, socialists must listen to and learn from the Movement for Black Lives and all other uprisings among the oppressed. But insofar as the structure and direction of modern society remain determined above all by the relentlessly exploitative and ecocidal force of capitalism—with its twin imperatives of ever-higher rates of profit and ruling-class social control—the tradition of Marxism, including the “isms” of socialism and communism, remains indispensable.

The Epidemic of Police Murders

Photo by Kelly Lacy from Pexels

The full text of Steve Martinot’s 2013 S&D article, “Probing the Epidemic of Police Murders,” has now been posted for free access on our publisher’s website as part of its current promotion of books and articles relevant to the Black Lives Matter protests. Martinot gives a full historical/theoretical interpretation of a phenomenon that, despite its relatively recent explosion into universal public awareness, has been plaguing US society from the beginning.

Readers may also wish to look up Steve’s recent article, “Defunding the Police,” published by the Berkeley Daily Planet earlier this month.

Remembering Bill DiFazio

Bill DiFazio, 1947 – 2020

The Marxist sociologist, William DiFazio, died March 10, 2020, at the age of 72 from complications related to diabetes. I met Bill in 1975 when we were both students at the CUNY Graduate Center. We remained friends for the next 45 years. 

Bill DiFazio wrote three books:

He hosted a popular radio show called  City Watch on WBAI from 2000-2016, where he interviewed community activists as well as radical intellectuals. There is a Wikipedia page for Bill, “William DeFazio.”

Bill contributed to a number of journals, including Social Text and Situations, where he served on the editorial board.  At the time of his death, he was writing a book to be called, Conversations in Diners: Ordinary People and The Crisis in Capitalism.

Bill DiFazio was a popular teacher at St. Johns in Queens, New York. He served as Chair of the Sociology Department at St. Johns for six years. He also volunteered at a food program run by St. Johns in Brooklyn for several years, where he did the fieldwork for, Ordinary Poverty.  Bill’s method of doing sociological research was called, “theoretical ethnography,” which differs from the standard type of ethnography done by most sociologists in the stress Bill placed on theoretical analysis. Both Longshoremen and Ordinary Poverty are clearly examples of theoretical ethnography. 

When Bill was a student at the CUNY Graduate Center, he studied with George Fischer, Mike Brown, Bill Kornblum, and Stanley Aronowitz. He participated in study groups that met in Mike Brown’s office for several years: beginning with Capital and then moving on to contemporary political economy. We went to parties at Bill’s apartment in Williamsburg. The justification for the parties was to celebrate someone’s Dissertation Defense, birthday, or life itself! Bill joined DSA before it was the popular thing to do. In the 1960s, he joined SDS, went to demonstrations against the Vietnam War, and gave his support to the Civil Rights movement – joining CORE and SNCC’s voting rights projects in the South. Bill was what Sartre called, an engaged intellectual. 

Bill DiFazio is survived by his wife, Susan Heller, a Brooklyn artist, and his daughter, Liegia DiFazio, an attorney in Atlanta. 

May 26: The Global Teach-In – Democratize the Crisis!

On Tuesday, May 26, 20120, starting at 10:00 a.m. (Eastern Daylight Time), a global network of scholars, trade unionists, development specialists, and democracy movement activists are launching the second online Global Teach-In to address the COVID-19 crisis and economic depression. Speakers include Hillary Wainwright, David Graeber, and Dario Padovan. To learn more about the Teach-In, visit http://GlobalTeachIn.com.

The British Medical Journal on President Donald J. Trump – as a determinant of COVID-19

A taut editorial published in the British Medical Journal provides a concise indictment of Donald Trump’s failed response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Put simply: “He downplayed the risk and delayed action, costing countless avertable deaths.” The editorial concludes with an appeal to social movement action:

To get through this, the US will need unprecedented social mobilisation. The dislocations call for a new social movement, inspired by the AIDS movement of the last 40 years—one that pushes local, state, and federal leaders to provide universal health coverage, universal sick pay, and rent and food assistance, focusing particularly on people who are poor, homeless, marginalised and those in jail or juvenile and immigration centres. Trump’s astounding incompetence was a political determinant of the US covid-19 epidemic. A new “politics of care” could be the corrective.

Image by Alexas_Fotos from Pixabay

Capitalism, Socialism and Disease

In a recent op-ed, Victor Wallis, S&D’s Editor-at-Large, contrasts how capitalist and socialist imperatives shape our responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. Wallis addresses the full range of issues from distributional questions including access to health care and prevention to macroeconomic matters and the immediate demands that we should address both nationally and globally. One of the more striking differences between systems, one that shatters the myth of capitalist abundance, is that leaders in capitalist countries simply lack the infrastructure and productive capacity to address the material needs, let alone organizational ones, required to either care for ill or bring a quick end to the pandemic. Decades of globalizing production and supply chains and shifting to a just-in-time production model makes for “efficiency” while leaving the entire system vulnerable to disruptions at multiple points and ensuring that very few countries and regions actually have the necessary productive capacity to immediately address these shortages. Reflecting on the specific healthcare dimension of this crisis, Wallis notes that a “socialist approach to healthcare… builds an infrastructure that can respond to emergency needs. This was strikingly shown just now in China, where urgently needed temporary hospitals were built (in Wuhan) in just two weeks. Moreover, a fully socialist approach, with its corresponding culture of cooperation, makes it possible, as Cuba has repeatedly shown, to extend health services on a large scale to people in other countries.” Read the full article at Political Animal Press’s magazine.

Toilet paper came to symbolize the shortages and panic buying typical of the earliest days of the pandemic in the United States. Image by Alexas_Fotos from Pixabay

Learning Curves: Climate Change

In a recent post, James Hansen, who first sounded the catastrophic climate change warning bells before the US Congress, notes the public’s increased literacy about the nature of growth curves and particularly the impact of early interventions. Regrettably, at this stage, we are late in the game of carbon mitigation and while the public may better understand the physics behind the exponential growth rates we are confronting, literacy about the social relations that drive the physics remains grossly inadequate. Hansen however cautions against despair, there are actions that can be taken. He notes, though, that the “present graph suggests that we have a lot of mitigation to do before we can flatten and bend downward the global temperature curve.”

The Roots of Mass Incarceration

In this excerpt from the first Shelter & Solidarity* episode, Johanna Fernández, a historian at Baruch College and most recently the author of The Young Lords, A Radical History (UNC Press 2020), explains the history of mass incarceration. She traces it to the anti-imperialist uprisings in the Global South and with the United States. The reactionary, harsh “law and order” response from the state – to lock up the working class and especially its black and brown ranks explain the phenomenon we now call, “Mass Incarceration.” With the decline of U.S. economic power and industrialization, sections of the white working class are also drawn into the phenomenon, both as the jailers and the jailed. (Further excerpts to follow.)

* Shelter & Solidarity is a joint project of S&D, Hardball Press, LaborPress.org, and encuentro5.