Sunday, March 12, 2017

International GDP per capita comparisons [feedly]

International GDP per capita comparisons
http://mainlymacro.blogspot.com/2017/03/international-gdp-per-capita-comparisons.html

As I have noted before, it is one of the great ironies of UK politics that recent growth only looks respectable because of immigration. Because mediamacro does not connect dots, politicians can get away with talking about a solid UK recovery, even though it is only half respectable because of the immigration they say must be reduced. But large migration flows are not just a UK experience.

The focus on GDP rather than GDP/capita distorts international comparisons as well. I conducted a small twitter poll (something over 500 votes) asking which of these 4 countries had grown most rapidly from 2006 to 2015: Germany, Japan, UK and US. Now those who voted are by self-selection well informed about economics, but over half chose the wrong answer in a comparison where the winner is ahead by a mile. Here is a chart (using IMF data).




I suspect the main reason why less than 50% chose Germany is that we are so used to GDP comparisons, and both the UK and the US experienced large scale immigration over this period. Using GDP the US wins (with 12% growth), closely followed by Germany (10.5%) and the UK (9.5%) with Japan way behind at 3.5%. But both the US and UK numbers are hugely flattered by immigration.

Why did Germany do so well in terms of the average living standards of its people? We need to talk about demand and supply. As readers should know, Germany suffered from austerity just as the US and UK did. But as you should also know, this was compensated for by a large competitive advantage it had gained over its fellow Eurozone members because of slow wage growth from 2000 to 2006. Strong growth in net trade made up for austerity, leading to a comparatively strong output per head performance (and, going with that, a huge current account surplus).

How was this demand boost met in terms of increased supply? Not through more rapid productivity growth (measured in terms of output per employed person), which hardly increased over this period. Instead it was through an amazing decrease in unemployment. In 2006 the unemployment rate in Germany was 10%, whereas by 2015 it was less than 5%. This in turn reflects the Hartz reforms, discussed by Tom Krebs and Martin Scheffel here. As they point out, this reform created losers (in terms of risk, particularly) as well as winners in terms of average income per head.

All this emphasises the point that GDP figures can be a poor guide to growth in average incomes. It also puts into perspective claims by Conservative politicians, widely repeated by the media, that the UK has been doing better than everyone else. Over this reasonably long period (you can always cherry pick short horizons), Germany has clearly been doing better than anyone else among the major countries, with growth from 2006 to 2015 of over 11%. Next come a group of countries at around 4% growth, including the USA and Japan as well as Sweden and Switzerland. Below them is another group of around 2% growth, including the UK, Ireland and the Netherlands. Just behind at 1% is France and Belgium.

The UK is certainly not at the bottom of the league, with a number of countries with GDP per capita in 2015 still below 2006 levels. These include Spain, Portugal, Finland and Denmark, with really poor performances from Italy and Troika run Greece. But growth of even 4% over 9 years is nothing to be proud of. Among all these countries, only Germany can claim to have actually recovered from the recession. [1]

[1] Outside this established group, we have seen strong growth from Australia, Israel, and the Czech and Slovak republics, as well as some smaller countries.

 -- via my feedly newsfeed

Re: [socialist-econ] CPUSA -- Above it all

Thanks, John for this critical focus on austerity and 40 years of stagnant wages. 

Sent from my iPhone

On Mar 12, 2017, at 4:18 PM, John Case <jcase4218@gmail.com> wrote:


With the best of intentions and sentiments, CP leader Bachtell delivers a typically impotent CP rebuke to fascism. The fascist threat will be rebuked when its driving cause, 40 years of Austerity, is directly addressed and reversed. Not before. Bachtell does not even mention that. Doing that would mean raising, not burying, effacing, minimizing or damning with faint praise, class politics in the midst of reveling in the abundance of "resistance" movements. Hat tips from "Communists" to these movements are no doubt elevating to the tipper. But who in the movements cares? the CP represents no class, none,  Airy speculations about all-peoples fronts and such from those with no base, and no prospects of one, are just that: hot air.

I suspect the faction online advocating that the whole Trump affair, and now the fate of democracy, is mainly about race and not class is loud in party ranks. I guess THEY won't be contending, like Sanders, "the new center" -- Joe Manchin  --  in the coalfields of West Virginia. Or engaging the gas fields either, with those evil pipeline workers and their building trades unions  begging Trump -- not the "multi-class allies" -- for jobs at a living wage.


Bachtell offers this, for those who might be tempted to criticize, like Sanders, the new "center": Senator Joe Manchin, of West Virginia:  "These approaches [that] advocate war against the political center at a moment when center-left unity is absolutely necessary..."

Unity on what? Does the "unity" include  -- first --  reversing austerity, which, by the way, does NOT require overthrowing capitalism, but does require a determined class struggle against the rights and prerogatives of billionaires? If not, it won't amount to dogshit in repairing working class disunity. And if that is not repaired, all the "multi-class" coalitions in the world won't remove the fascists, and the fetid petri dish of austerity in which they thrive and are reborn. If you do not use a class approach -- who are YOUR people, YOUR way of life -- if ordinary people are not drawn into motion in the millions, you wont ever know what the basis of popular unity really is. For example -- you might find that fixing austerity HAS TO COME BEFORE bathroom rights in North Carolina, if you were listening to millions, not the "left".

Of course this discourse is all a waste of time with the CP and some similar orgs -- orgs with no base have no real way of politically verifying their positions, and thus can remain firmly planted in mid-air for lifetimes. It was effectively liquidated in the 50's by a combination of repression and sectarianism. It revived a half Zombie existence in the sixties at the pleasure of the  CPSU and a quid pro quo with the Kennedy Administration. It's leaders got out of jail. It succeeded in getting Angela Davis out of jail -- its singular post-war actual accomplishment, beyond a repository of militant memories. Soviet cash helped pay for the paper and presidential campaigns of Gus Hall. Which makes the CP going after Trump for foreign interference a bit, well, compromised to say the least.

But I offer it as an example of what not to do as the resistance goes forward.

Stay away from sectarian outfits with "profound world-scale views" but no legs, and giant suitcases of dead weights they will ask you to carry for them on the way to "liberation".



jcase




***********************************************************************************************************************************



Donald Trump and the alt-right cabal in the White House pose a dire threat to truth, democracy, peace, and life on the planet.

The danger they present is compounded by Trump's mental instability and his attraction to dark conspiracies, including the latest one accusing President Obama of secretly directing the growing resistance.

This charge, which resonates among the white nationalists, racists, and conspiracy theorists of the alt-right, is a threat against Obama.

The Resistance

An unprecedented upsurge of resistance is engaging millions of Americans who understand the stakes. This resistance is based on the 66 million who voted for Hillary Clinton and millions more who either didn't vote or voted third party. It will eventually include many of those who voted for Trump and come to realize they made a profound mistake.

It also encompasses Democrats in Congress, parts of the judiciary (especially in Democratic-controlled states), fissures in the state institutions (including the intelligence community), and resistance by government workers.

It embraces entire state, county, and city governments controlled by Democrats, people of every faith, scientists, artists, celebrities, professional athletes, universities, and much of the mass media – both corporate and independent.

It includes almost the entire Democratic Party, independents, and moderate Republicans.

It includes emerging movements such as Fight for $15, Black Lives Matter, the Dreamers, climate justice, Native American rights, transgender rights, and the thousands of grassroots neighborhood committees springing up to oppose the Trump policies.

Fissures, chaos, and divisions

The resistance is compounding chaos and division within the administration and slowing down the Trump/GOP juggernaut.

The administration is further hampered by the scandal over Russian interference in the 2016 elections and possible collusion with Trump to sabotage the Clinton campaign.

Fissures are emerging within GOP ranks and between the White House, GOP Congressional leadership, and with some GOP governors, forcing delay in passing their agenda.

It is no accident Trump was unable to offer many specifics in his speech to the joint session of Congress on Feb. 28. His main initiatives are the Muslim bans and the plan to build a U.S.–Mexican border wall, both geared to firing up his base and dividing the electorate.

Exploding opposition has placed Trump and the GOP on the defensive on some issues. For example, Trump and the GOP have no unified approach to the "repeal and replacement" of Obamacare and may be headed toward self-created "gridlock."

Bigger movements, greater unity needed

Participants in the Marxist Strategy and Tactics Seminar in Chicago, Feb. 19. | CPUSA

So far Trump's base, including among Republican voters, continues to back him. A shift of public opinion among these voters, can force the most vulnerable GOP elected officials to break ranks and oppose aspects of the Trump/GOP program before the 2018 elections.

It will take a much bigger movement to halt the breaching of democratic norms and the threat to constitutional rights. It will take a majority of Americans to resist, slow down, and block the Trump/GOP agenda, and ultimately defeat Republican majorities in Congress and statehouses and their ideas in the court of public opinion.

It will take more highly engaged activism, extending broader and deeper into the grassroots and among Trump voters and so-called "red" congressional districts and states.

Despite how they voted, millions can be united to defend the Affordable Care Act, Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, the EPA, and Planned Parenthood.

Simultaneously, influences of racism, xenophobia, Islamophobia, homophobia, anti-Semitism, and misogyny among Trump's supporters must be challenged – particularly among millions of whites. Such influences come primarily from the ubiquitous right-wing mass media and the conservative Christian Evangelical church networks.

A section of primarily white voters makes up the hard core of Trump's support and are thoroughly under the sway of right-wing ideology. Many of these could be drawn into an organized "alt-right" and even fascist-type movement.

However, another sizeable segment is not deeply tethered to Trump. They can and must be convinced their future is tied to multi-racial working class unity and the people's movement led by organized labor.

Trump effectively scapegoated immigrants, Muslims, and African Americans to exploit the fears generated by the massive economic, social, cultural, and demographic changes taking place with in conjunction with capitalist globalization and neoliberal policies. His tactics resulted in 40 percent of trade union households, mainly among white workers, supporting Trump.

The alt-right cabal around Trump aims to exploit these working class divisions and drive a wedge in the multi-racial organized labor and people's movement, rendering its opposition impotent. These dangers are inherent in the administration's attempts to foster a strategic relationship with the AFL-CIO Building and Construction Trades.

The alt-right's nefarious aim is to create a governing united front of white voters allowing the administration to implement policies to reverse the long-term demographic shifts rapidly occurring in the U.S.

All-People's Coalition

An all-people's coalition comprising the overwhelming majority of the American people is needed to defeat Trump and defend democracy, inclusivity, peace, and the environment.

Such a loose anti-right alliance has been (and is still being) built through the ups-and-downs, the advances and reverses of the political and legislative battles and election cycles that have spanned the last 35 years.

It reflects a convergence of many complex alliances and movements on a number of levels. By nature, it's a dynamic multi-class, multi-racial, multi-gender, multi-generational, and multi-tendency alliance – basically, everyone opposed to the right.

It embraces the forces led by the multi-racial working class and its organized sector, communities of color, women, youth and all the democratic movements and social networks in loose alliance with fragments of the capitalist class that are themselves in conflict with the extreme rightwing.

The multi-racial working class and other core social forces – communities of color, women, youth, and a range of democratic movements – play a fundamental and central role in shaping the politics and building the breadth and depth of the broader all-people's coalition with all its inherent class and social contradictions.

Application of united front against fascism to today

The rise of fascism in Germany and Italy and militarism in Japan also brought into existence a global anti-fascist movement. The international Communist movement made a singular contribution to understanding the nature of fascism and what was needed to defeat it.

During the Seventh World Congress of the Communist International held in 1935, the Bulgarian Communist Georgi Dimitrov advanced the idea of uniting every force possible against the fascist menace. This constituted the "popular front," and within it was the "united front," or the special need for the unity of all working class forces specifically.

In the U.S., the "popular front" was known as the "People's Front," mobilizing millions against fascism abroad and the Republican Party and reactionary class and social forces arrayed against the New Deal coalition at home.

Fast forward to 1980 and the rise of Ronald Reagan. His election marked the emergence of a new extreme right danger to democracy and social progress. Its central feature was the takeover of the Republican Party by extreme right, racist, religious fundamentalist, and social conservative forces.

The CPUSA, along with other forces, identified this new danger to democracy early on and called for the formation of an "all-people's front" to defeat it. This outlook has been widely embraced as the right-wing danger has grown.

Multi-class alliances: Unity and struggle

Multi-class alliances are nothing new. Marx, Engels, Lenin, Gramsci, and Dimitrov recognized them as a necessary part of advancing the interests of the working class at various stages in the fight to expand economic, social, and political democracy and defeat fascism.

U.S. history is rich with examples, including the struggle to end slavery and the Civil War, the fight against fascism in World War II, and today's fight for climate justice.

Racial and gender oppression cross class lines. For example, the struggle for equality encompasses all African Americans and all women, regardless of class.

The struggle to prevent an ecological catastrophe spans classes in conflict with the fossil fuel sector.

Such an approach also recognizes the existence of contradictions, shades of difference, fissures, and splits among factions of the ruling class and the possibility of exploiting them.

It recognizes the struggle for economic and social justice and democratic socialism passes through multiple stages, which are not neatly demarcated and often overlap.

It recognizes that at each stage key political objectives must be identified along with the necessary class and social forces needed to decisively shift the political balance of forces.

These are temporary class alliances based on momentary coinciding class interests. They invariably result in some compromises, however temporary, by the various contending class and social forces.

They are naturally unstable and unreliable allies and strictly follow their own class interests. On one issue they may be allies, and on another, foes.

Irreconcilable class antagonisms and contradictions do not disappear. The working class doesn't cease fighting for its interests or building independent organizational and political capacity, as the AFL-CIO has shown in establishing its own independent political mobilizing structure.

Left-center unity

The all-people's coalition is not based on organizing the left against the right wing. The left alone, while growing, can't defeat Trump and right-wing extremism. Broad unity of left and center political currents along with every other class and social force opposed to the right is needed.

Unity of the broad, diverse, and multi-layered people's movement – led by the multi-racial working class and organized labor – is fundamental. Its ability to influence the overall coalition depends on the extent to which it achieves broad multi-racial, multi-gender, and native-born/immigrant unity, as well as its level of engagement.

The main efforts of the left must be concentrated in building this movement at the grassroots – in all directions, as broad and deep and possible, with a focus on unity. Otherwise, the working class will be unable to play its leading role and put its imprint on the broader multi-class alliance.

Some on the left assert that the political center has collapsed and that, therefore, the concept of left-center unity no longer applies.

However, even with increasing polarization, recent polls showed about one-third of the electorate and 38 percent of Democrats identify as political moderates.

The center forces in the Democratic Party reflecting much of the corporate establishment are still powerful, well-resourced, deeply entrenched, and they control most state and city organizations.

There is simultaneous unity and contestation taking place between the establishment and progressive wings of Democratic Party – a reflection of the disparate, contradictory class and social forces of this electoral coalition.

That doesn't mean the left should cease criticism of the center or stop opposing centrist forces when necessary. Progressive independent forces in Chicago sharply criticize Mayor Rahm Emanuel's administration's pro-corporate tendencies, policing policies, and privatization of public education. But this occurs in the context of the overall fight against Trump and the GOP. Emanuel is an ally in this fight as a supporter of the Sanctuary City movement and a defender of ACA, Medicaid, and Medicare.

The Democratic Party establishment is responding to the massive upsurge, reaching out to the progressive wing and waging a largely united, determined fight against the Trump agenda.

Center and left currents and political demands are not static and change under the impact of class and social movements and the growing mass upsurge against Trump. The changing demands of the center are the starting point for unity.

The emerging movements and shifts in public opinion and the impact of the Sanders campaign that gave voice to them all impacted the process of unity and contestation. This led to the most advanced platform of a major party in history being adopted at the Democratic National Convention last summer.

DLC/Third Way style politics have been discredited and the center has moved away from many positions, as evidenced by Clinton campaign. This shift should be welcomed, but under no circumstances should we assume center forces will give up efforts to assert their interests.

The broad left should continue advancing its agenda, developing a loose program reflecting the people's coalition led by labor. It helps influence the direction of the overall struggle.

Left attacks on the center

One left trend has concluded the Democratic Party center is responsible for the 2016 election loss. They believe the center is an obstacle to defeating Trump and that the left can defeat Trump, the GOP, and the extreme right all on its own. They see any engagement between left and center as futile.

Based on the response to the Sanders campaign, Jacobin editor Bhaskar Sunkara calls for a left-populist alternative, which he thinks is the only way to defeat right-wing extremism. Environmentalist Naomi Klein advocates either taking over the Democratic Party or founding a third party.

These approaches advocate war against the political center at a moment when center-left unity is absolutely necessary.

Today, millions are pouring into the streets on the basis of stopping Trump and defending democracy. The left current is a vital and growing part of this all-peoples movement. If its approach is geared toward building the broadest unity, it will emerge from a defeat of Trump as a stronger force capable of giving greater leadership to more advanced stages of struggle that lie ahead.


-- 
John Case
Harpers Ferry, WV

The Winners and Losers Radio Show
7-9 AM Weekdays, The EPIC Radio Player Stream, 
Sign UP HERE to get the Weekly Program Notes.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Socialist Economics" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to socialist-economics+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to socialist-economics@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/socialist-economics.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/socialist-economics/CADH2idKrX7XxJRojCiTWMki%3DWyJgC-MKgVWBZzH1s3MGNpdUeQ%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [CCDS Members] CPUSA -- Above it all

Of course it's about class and class struggle.  It always is.  The ruling class uses racism to divide the working class against itself, esp. in this country.  It's a major reason why they continue to win.
 
All the best to all, Steve Jonas
 
In a message dated 3/12/2017 4:18:06 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, jcase4218@gmail.com writes:

With the best of intentions and sentiments, CP leader Bachtell delivers a typically impotent CP rebuke to fascism. The fascist threat will be rebuked when its driving cause, 40 years of Austerity, is directly addressed and reversed. Not before. Bachtell does not even mention that. Doing that would mean raising, not burying, effacing, minimizing or damning with faint praise, class politics in the midst of reveling in the abundance of "resistance" movements. Hat tips from "Communists" to these movements are no doubt elevating to the tipper. But who in the movements cares? the CP represents no class, none,  Airy speculations about all-peoples fronts and such from those with no base, and no prospects of one, are just that: hot air.

I suspect the faction online advocating that the whole Trump affair, and now the fate of democracy, is mainly about race and not class is loud in party ranks. I guess THEY won't be contending, like Sanders, "the new center" -- Joe Manchin  --  in the coalfields of West Virginia. Or engaging the gas fields either, with those evil pipeline workers and their building trades unions  begging Trump -- not the "multi-class allies" -- for jobs at a living wage.


Bachtell offers this, for those who might be tempted to criticize, like Sanders, the new "center": Senator Joe Manchin, of West Virginia:  "These approaches [that] advocate war against the political center at a moment when center-left unity is absolutely necessary..."

Unity on what? Does the "unity" include  -- first --  reversing austerity, which, by the way, does NOT require overthrowing capitalism, but does require a determined class struggle against the rights and prerogatives of billionaires? If not, it won't amount to dogshit in repairing working class disunity. And if that is not repaired, all the "multi-class" coalitions in the world won't remove the fascists, and the fetid petri dish of austerity in which they thrive and are reborn. If you do not use a class approach -- who are YOUR people, YOUR way of life -- if ordinary people are not drawn into motion in the millions, you wont ever know what the basis of popular unity really is. For example -- you might find that fixing austerity HAS TO COME BEFORE bathroom rights in North Carolina, if you were listening to millions, not the "left".

Of course this discourse is all a waste of time with the CP and some similar orgs -- orgs with no base have no real way of politically verifying their positions, and thus can remain firmly planted in mid-air for lifetimes. It was effectively liquidated in the 50's by a combination of repression and sectarianism. It revived a half Zombie existence in the sixties at the pleasure of the  CPSU and a quid pro quo with the Kennedy Administration. It's leaders got out of jail. It succeeded in getting Angela Davis out of jail -- its singular post-war actual accomplishment, beyond a repository of militant memories. Soviet cash helped pay for the paper and presidential campaigns of Gus Hall. Which makes the CP going after Trump for foreign interference a bit, well, compromised to say the least.

But I offer it as an example of what not to do as the resistance goes forward.

Stay away from sectarian outfits with "profound world-scale views" but no legs, and giant suitcases of dead weights they will ask you to carry for them on the way to "liberation".



jcase




***********************************************************************************************************************************



Donald Trump and the alt-right cabal in the White House pose a dire threat to truth, democracy, peace, and life on the planet.

The danger they present is compounded by Trump's mental instability and his attraction to dark conspiracies, including the latest one accusing President Obama of secretly directing the growing resistance.

This charge, which resonates among the white nationalists, racists, and conspiracy theorists of the alt-right, is a threat against Obama.

The Resistance

An unprecedented upsurge of resistance is engaging millions of Americans who understand the stakes. This resistance is based on the 66 million who voted for Hillary Clinton and millions more who either didn't vote or voted third party. It will eventually include many of those who voted for Trump and come to realize they made a profound mistake.

It also encompasses Democrats in Congress, parts of the judiciary (especially in Democratic-controlled states), fissures in the state institutions (including the intelligence community), and resistance by government workers.

It embraces entire state, county, and city governments controlled by Democrats, people of every faith, scientists, artists, celebrities, professional athletes, universities, and much of the mass media – both corporate and independent.

It includes almost the entire Democratic Party, independents, and moderate Republicans.

It includes emerging movements such as Fight for $15, Black Lives Matter, the Dreamers, climate justice, Native American rights, transgender rights, and the thousands of grassroots neighborhood committees springing up to oppose the Trump policies.

Fissures, chaos, and divisions

The resistance is compounding chaos and division within the administration and slowing down the Trump/GOP juggernaut.

The administration is further hampered by the scandal over Russian interference in the 2016 elections and possible collusion with Trump to sabotage the Clinton campaign.

Fissures are emerging within GOP ranks and between the White House, GOP Congressional leadership, and with some GOP governors, forcing delay in passing their agenda.

It is no accident Trump was unable to offer many specifics in his speech to the joint session of Congress on Feb. 28. His main initiatives are the Muslim bans and the plan to build a U.S.–Mexican border wall, both geared to firing up his base and dividing the electorate.

Exploding opposition has placed Trump and the GOP on the defensive on some issues. For example, Trump and the GOP have no unified approach to the "repeal and replacement" of Obamacare and may be headed toward self-created "gridlock."

Bigger movements, greater unity needed

Participants in the Marxist Strategy and Tactics Seminar in Chicago, Feb. 19. | CPUSA

So far Trump's base, including among Republican voters, continues to back him. A shift of public opinion among these voters, can force the most vulnerable GOP elected officials to break ranks and oppose aspects of the Trump/GOP program before the 2018 elections.

It will take a much bigger movement to halt the breaching of democratic norms and the threat to constitutional rights. It will take a majority of Americans to resist, slow down, and block the Trump/GOP agenda, and ultimately defeat Republican majorities in Congress and statehouses and their ideas in the court of public opinion.

It will take more highly engaged activism, extending broader and deeper into the grassroots and among Trump voters and so-called "red" congressional districts and states.

Despite how they voted, millions can be united to defend the Affordable Care Act, Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, the EPA, and Planned Parenthood.

Simultaneously, influences of racism, xenophobia, Islamophobia, homophobia, anti-Semitism, and misogyny among Trump's supporters must be challenged – particularly among millions of whites. Such influences come primarily from the ubiquitous right-wing mass media and the conservative Christian Evangelical church networks.

A section of primarily white voters makes up the hard core of Trump's support and are thoroughly under the sway of right-wing ideology. Many of these could be drawn into an organized "alt-right" and even fascist-type movement.

However, another sizeable segment is not deeply tethered to Trump. They can and must be convinced their future is tied to multi-racial working class unity and the people's movement led by organized labor.

Trump effectively scapegoated immigrants, Muslims, and African Americans to exploit the fears generated by the massive economic, social, cultural, and demographic changes taking place with in conjunction with capitalist globalization and neoliberal policies. His tactics resulted in 40 percent of trade union households, mainly among white workers, supporting Trump.

The alt-right cabal around Trump aims to exploit these working class divisions and drive a wedge in the multi-racial organized labor and people's movement, rendering its opposition impotent. These dangers are inherent in the administration's attempts to foster a strategic relationship with the AFL-CIO Building and Construction Trades.

The alt-right's nefarious aim is to create a governing united front of white voters allowing the administration to implement policies to reverse the long-term demographic shifts rapidly occurring in the U.S.

All-People's Coalition

An all-people's coalition comprising the overwhelming majority of the American people is needed to defeat Trump and defend democracy, inclusivity, peace, and the environment.

Such a loose anti-right alliance has been (and is still being) built through the ups-and-downs, the advances and reverses of the political and legislative battles and election cycles that have spanned the last 35 years.

It reflects a convergence of many complex alliances and movements on a number of levels. By nature, it's a dynamic multi-class, multi-racial, multi-gender, multi-generational, and multi-tendency alliance – basically, everyone opposed to the right.

It embraces the forces led by the multi-racial working class and its organized sector, communities of color, women, youth and all the democratic movements and social networks in loose alliance with fragments of the capitalist class that are themselves in conflict with the extreme rightwing.

The multi-racial working class and other core social forces – communities of color, women, youth, and a range of democratic movements – play a fundamental and central role in shaping the politics and building the breadth and depth of the broader all-people's coalition with all its inherent class and social contradictions.

Application of united front against fascism to today

The rise of fascism in Germany and Italy and militarism in Japan also brought into existence a global anti-fascist movement. The international Communist movement made a singular contribution to understanding the nature of fascism and what was needed to defeat it.

During the Seventh World Congress of the Communist International held in 1935, the Bulgarian Communist Georgi Dimitrov advanced the idea of uniting every force possible against the fascist menace. This constituted the "popular front," and within it was the "united front," or the special need for the unity of all working class forces specifically.

In the U.S., the "popular front" was known as the "People's Front," mobilizing millions against fascism abroad and the Republican Party and reactionary class and social forces arrayed against the New Deal coalition at home.

Fast forward to 1980 and the rise of Ronald Reagan. His election marked the emergence of a new extreme right danger to democracy and social progress. Its central feature was the takeover of the Republican Party by extreme right, racist, religious fundamentalist, and social conservative forces.

The CPUSA, along with other forces, identified this new danger to democracy early on and called for the formation of an "all-people's front" to defeat it. This outlook has been widely embraced as the right-wing danger has grown.

Multi-class alliances: Unity and struggle

Multi-class alliances are nothing new. Marx, Engels, Lenin, Gramsci, and Dimitrov recognized them as a necessary part of advancing the interests of the working class at various stages in the fight to expand economic, social, and political democracy and defeat fascism.

U.S. history is rich with examples, including the struggle to end slavery and the Civil War, the fight against fascism in World War II, and today's fight for climate justice.

Racial and gender oppression cross class lines. For example, the struggle for equality encompasses all African Americans and all women, regardless of class.

The struggle to prevent an ecological catastrophe spans classes in conflict with the fossil fuel sector.

Such an approach also recognizes the existence of contradictions, shades of difference, fissures, and splits among factions of the ruling class and the possibility of exploiting them.

It recognizes the struggle for economic and social justice and democratic socialism passes through multiple stages, which are not neatly demarcated and often overlap.

It recognizes that at each stage key political objectives must be identified along with the necessary class and social forces needed to decisively shift the political balance of forces.

These are temporary class alliances based on momentary coinciding class interests. They invariably result in some compromises, however temporary, by the various contending class and social forces.

They are naturally unstable and unreliable allies and strictly follow their own class interests. On one issue they may be allies, and on another, foes.

Irreconcilable class antagonisms and contradictions do not disappear. The working class doesn't cease fighting for its interests or building independent organizational and political capacity, as the AFL-CIO has shown in establishing its own independent political mobilizing structure.

Left-center unity

The all-people's coalition is not based on organizing the left against the right wing. The left alone, while growing, can't defeat Trump and right-wing extremism. Broad unity of left and center political currents along with every other class and social force opposed to the right is needed.

Unity of the broad, diverse, and multi-layered people's movement – led by the multi-racial working class and organized labor – is fundamental. Its ability to influence the overall coalition depends on the extent to which it achieves broad multi-racial, multi-gender, and native-born/immigrant unity, as well as its level of engagement.

The main efforts of the left must be concentrated in building this movement at the grassroots – in all directions, as broad and deep and possible, with a focus on unity. Otherwise, the working class will be unable to play its leading role and put its imprint on the broader multi-class alliance.

Some on the left assert that the political center has collapsed and that, therefore, the concept of left-center unity no longer applies.

However, even with increasing polarization, recent polls showed about one-third of the electorate and 38 percent of Democrats identify as political moderates.

The center forces in the Democratic Party reflecting much of the corporate establishment are still powerful, well-resourced, deeply entrenched, and they control most state and city organizations.

There is simultaneous unity and contestation taking place between the establishment and progressive wings of Democratic Party – a reflection of the disparate, contradictory class and social forces of this electoral coalition.

That doesn't mean the left should cease criticism of the center or stop opposing centrist forces when necessary. Progressive independent forces in Chicago sharply criticize Mayor Rahm Emanuel's administration's pro-corporate tendencies, policing policies, and privatization of public education. But this occurs in the context of the overall fight against Trump and the GOP. Emanuel is an ally in this fight as a supporter of the Sanctuary City movement and a defender of ACA, Medicaid, and Medicare.

The Democratic Party establishment is responding to the massive upsurge, reaching out to the progressive wing and waging a largely united, determined fight against the Trump agenda.

Center and left currents and political demands are not static and change under the impact of class and social movements and the growing mass upsurge against Trump. The changing demands of the center are the starting point for unity.

The emerging movements and shifts in public opinion and the impact of the Sanders campaign that gave voice to them all impacted the process of unity and contestation. This led to the most advanced platform of a major party in history being adopted at the Democratic National Convention last summer.

DLC/Third Way style politics have been discredited and the center has moved away from many positions, as evidenced by Clinton campaign. This shift should be welcomed, but under no circumstances should we assume center forces will give up efforts to assert their interests.

The broad left should continue advancing its agenda, developing a loose program reflecting the people's coalition led by labor. It helps influence the direction of the overall struggle.

Left attacks on the center

One left trend has concluded the Democratic Party center is responsible for the 2016 election loss. They believe the center is an obstacle to defeating Trump and that the left can defeat Trump, the GOP, and the extreme right all on its own. They see any engagement between left and center as futile.

Based on the response to the Sanders campaign, Jacobin editor Bhaskar Sunkara calls for a left-populist alternative, which he thinks is the only way to defeat right-wing extremism. Environmentalist Naomi Klein advocates either taking over the Democratic Party or founding a third party.

These approaches advocate war against the political center at a moment when center-left unity is absolutely necessary.

Today, millions are pouring into the streets on the basis of stopping Trump and defending democracy. The left current is a vital and growing part of this all-peoples movement. If its approach is geared toward building the broadest unity, it will emerge from a defeat of Trump as a stronger force capable of giving greater leadership to more advanced stages of struggle that lie ahead.


-- 
John Case
Harpers Ferry, WV

The Winners and Losers Radio Show
7-9 AM Weekdays, The EPIC Radio Player Stream, 
Sign UP HERE to get the Weekly Program Notes.


_______________________________________________
CCDS Members mailing list

CCDS website: http://www.cc-ds.org

CCDS welcomes and encourages the full participation of our members in
this list serve. It is intended for discussion of issues of concern to
our organization and its members, for building our community, for
respectfully expressing our different points of view, all in keeping
with our commitment to building a democratic and socialist society. To
those ends, free and honest discussion of issues and ideas is
encouraged. However, personal attacks on named individuals, carrying on
old vendettas, excessive posts and, especially, statements that are
racist, sexist, homophobic, anti-semitic and/or anti-working class are not
appropriate.

Repeated failure to respect those principles of discussion
may result in exclusion from the list.
Please respect each other and our organization.

Any member of the list who objects to a posting on the list or the
behavior of a particular member should send email describing his or her
concerns to members-owner@lists.cc-ds.org

Post: Members@lists.cc-ds.org
List info and archives: https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/members
To Unsubscribe, send email to:
Members-unsubscribe@lists.cc-ds.org
To Unsubscribe, change your email address, your password or your preferences:
   visit: https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/members/sjonastriski%40aol.com

You are subscribed as: sjonastriski@aol.com

CPUSA -- Above it all


With the best of intentions and sentiments, CP leader Bachtell delivers a typically impotent CP rebuke to fascism. The fascist threat will be rebuked when its driving cause, 40 years of Austerity, is directly addressed and reversed. Not before. Bachtell does not even mention that. Doing that would mean raising, not burying, effacing, minimizing or damning with faint praise, class politics in the midst of reveling in the abundance of "resistance" movements. Hat tips from "Communists" to these movements are no doubt elevating to the tipper. But who in the movements cares? the CP represents no class, none,  Airy speculations about all-peoples fronts and such from those with no base, and no prospects of one, are just that: hot air.

I suspect the faction online advocating that the whole Trump affair, and now the fate of democracy, is mainly about race and not class is loud in party ranks. I guess THEY won't be contending, like Sanders, "the new center" -- Joe Manchin  --  in the coalfields of West Virginia. Or engaging the gas fields either, with those evil pipeline workers and their building trades unions  begging Trump -- not the "multi-class allies" -- for jobs at a living wage.


Bachtell offers this, for those who might be tempted to criticize, like Sanders, the new "center": Senator Joe Manchin, of West Virginia:  "These approaches [that] advocate war against the political center at a moment when center-left unity is absolutely necessary..."

Unity on what? Does the "unity" include  -- first --  reversing austerity, which, by the way, does NOT require overthrowing capitalism, but does require a determined class struggle against the rights and prerogatives of billionaires? If not, it won't amount to dogshit in repairing working class disunity. And if that is not repaired, all the "multi-class" coalitions in the world won't remove the fascists, and the fetid petri dish of austerity in which they thrive and are reborn. If you do not use a class approach -- who are YOUR people, YOUR way of life -- if ordinary people are not drawn into motion in the millions, you wont ever know what the basis of popular unity really is. For example -- you might find that fixing austerity HAS TO COME BEFORE bathroom rights in North Carolina, if you were listening to millions, not the "left".

Of course this discourse is all a waste of time with the CP and some similar orgs -- orgs with no base have no real way of politically verifying their positions, and thus can remain firmly planted in mid-air for lifetimes. It was effectively liquidated in the 50's by a combination of repression and sectarianism. It revived a half Zombie existence in the sixties at the pleasure of the  CPSU and a quid pro quo with the Kennedy Administration. It's leaders got out of jail. It succeeded in getting Angela Davis out of jail -- its singular post-war actual accomplishment, beyond a repository of militant memories. Soviet cash helped pay for the paper and presidential campaigns of Gus Hall. Which makes the CP going after Trump for foreign interference a bit, well, compromised to say the least.

But I offer it as an example of what not to do as the resistance goes forward.

Stay away from sectarian outfits with "profound world-scale views" but no legs, and giant suitcases of dead weights they will ask you to carry for them on the way to "liberation".



jcase




***********************************************************************************************************************************



Donald Trump and the alt-right cabal in the White House pose a dire threat to truth, democracy, peace, and life on the planet.

The danger they present is compounded by Trump's mental instability and his attraction to dark conspiracies, including the latest one accusing President Obama of secretly directing the growing resistance.

This charge, which resonates among the white nationalists, racists, and conspiracy theorists of the alt-right, is a threat against Obama.

The Resistance

An unprecedented upsurge of resistance is engaging millions of Americans who understand the stakes. This resistance is based on the 66 million who voted for Hillary Clinton and millions more who either didn't vote or voted third party. It will eventually include many of those who voted for Trump and come to realize they made a profound mistake.

It also encompasses Democrats in Congress, parts of the judiciary (especially in Democratic-controlled states), fissures in the state institutions (including the intelligence community), and resistance by government workers.

It embraces entire state, county, and city governments controlled by Democrats, people of every faith, scientists, artists, celebrities, professional athletes, universities, and much of the mass media – both corporate and independent.

It includes almost the entire Democratic Party, independents, and moderate Republicans.

It includes emerging movements such as Fight for $15, Black Lives Matter, the Dreamers, climate justice, Native American rights, transgender rights, and the thousands of grassroots neighborhood committees springing up to oppose the Trump policies.

Fissures, chaos, and divisions

The resistance is compounding chaos and division within the administration and slowing down the Trump/GOP juggernaut.

The administration is further hampered by the scandal over Russian interference in the 2016 elections and possible collusion with Trump to sabotage the Clinton campaign.

Fissures are emerging within GOP ranks and between the White House, GOP Congressional leadership, and with some GOP governors, forcing delay in passing their agenda.

It is no accident Trump was unable to offer many specifics in his speech to the joint session of Congress on Feb. 28. His main initiatives are the Muslim bans and the plan to build a U.S.–Mexican border wall, both geared to firing up his base and dividing the electorate.

Exploding opposition has placed Trump and the GOP on the defensive on some issues. For example, Trump and the GOP have no unified approach to the "repeal and replacement" of Obamacare and may be headed toward self-created "gridlock."

Bigger movements, greater unity needed

Participants in the Marxist Strategy and Tactics Seminar in Chicago, Feb. 19. | CPUSA

So far Trump's base, including among Republican voters, continues to back him. A shift of public opinion among these voters, can force the most vulnerable GOP elected officials to break ranks and oppose aspects of the Trump/GOP program before the 2018 elections.

It will take a much bigger movement to halt the breaching of democratic norms and the threat to constitutional rights. It will take a majority of Americans to resist, slow down, and block the Trump/GOP agenda, and ultimately defeat Republican majorities in Congress and statehouses and their ideas in the court of public opinion.

It will take more highly engaged activism, extending broader and deeper into the grassroots and among Trump voters and so-called "red" congressional districts and states.

Despite how they voted, millions can be united to defend the Affordable Care Act, Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, the EPA, and Planned Parenthood.

Simultaneously, influences of racism, xenophobia, Islamophobia, homophobia, anti-Semitism, and misogyny among Trump's supporters must be challenged – particularly among millions of whites. Such influences come primarily from the ubiquitous right-wing mass media and the conservative Christian Evangelical church networks.

A section of primarily white voters makes up the hard core of Trump's support and are thoroughly under the sway of right-wing ideology. Many of these could be drawn into an organized "alt-right" and even fascist-type movement.

However, another sizeable segment is not deeply tethered to Trump. They can and must be convinced their future is tied to multi-racial working class unity and the people's movement led by organized labor.

Trump effectively scapegoated immigrants, Muslims, and African Americans to exploit the fears generated by the massive economic, social, cultural, and demographic changes taking place with in conjunction with capitalist globalization and neoliberal policies. His tactics resulted in 40 percent of trade union households, mainly among white workers, supporting Trump.

The alt-right cabal around Trump aims to exploit these working class divisions and drive a wedge in the multi-racial organized labor and people's movement, rendering its opposition impotent. These dangers are inherent in the administration's attempts to foster a strategic relationship with the AFL-CIO Building and Construction Trades.

The alt-right's nefarious aim is to create a governing united front of white voters allowing the administration to implement policies to reverse the long-term demographic shifts rapidly occurring in the U.S.

All-People's Coalition

An all-people's coalition comprising the overwhelming majority of the American people is needed to defeat Trump and defend democracy, inclusivity, peace, and the environment.

Such a loose anti-right alliance has been (and is still being) built through the ups-and-downs, the advances and reverses of the political and legislative battles and election cycles that have spanned the last 35 years.

It reflects a convergence of many complex alliances and movements on a number of levels. By nature, it's a dynamic multi-class, multi-racial, multi-gender, multi-generational, and multi-tendency alliance – basically, everyone opposed to the right.

It embraces the forces led by the multi-racial working class and its organized sector, communities of color, women, youth and all the democratic movements and social networks in loose alliance with fragments of the capitalist class that are themselves in conflict with the extreme rightwing.

The multi-racial working class and other core social forces – communities of color, women, youth, and a range of democratic movements – play a fundamental and central role in shaping the politics and building the breadth and depth of the broader all-people's coalition with all its inherent class and social contradictions.

Application of united front against fascism to today

The rise of fascism in Germany and Italy and militarism in Japan also brought into existence a global anti-fascist movement. The international Communist movement made a singular contribution to understanding the nature of fascism and what was needed to defeat it.

During the Seventh World Congress of the Communist International held in 1935, the Bulgarian Communist Georgi Dimitrov advanced the idea of uniting every force possible against the fascist menace. This constituted the "popular front," and within it was the "united front," or the special need for the unity of all working class forces specifically.

In the U.S., the "popular front" was known as the "People's Front," mobilizing millions against fascism abroad and the Republican Party and reactionary class and social forces arrayed against the New Deal coalition at home.

Fast forward to 1980 and the rise of Ronald Reagan. His election marked the emergence of a new extreme right danger to democracy and social progress. Its central feature was the takeover of the Republican Party by extreme right, racist, religious fundamentalist, and social conservative forces.

The CPUSA, along with other forces, identified this new danger to democracy early on and called for the formation of an "all-people's front" to defeat it. This outlook has been widely embraced as the right-wing danger has grown.

Multi-class alliances: Unity and struggle

Multi-class alliances are nothing new. Marx, Engels, Lenin, Gramsci, and Dimitrov recognized them as a necessary part of advancing the interests of the working class at various stages in the fight to expand economic, social, and political democracy and defeat fascism.

U.S. history is rich with examples, including the struggle to end slavery and the Civil War, the fight against fascism in World War II, and today's fight for climate justice.

Racial and gender oppression cross class lines. For example, the struggle for equality encompasses all African Americans and all women, regardless of class.

The struggle to prevent an ecological catastrophe spans classes in conflict with the fossil fuel sector.

Such an approach also recognizes the existence of contradictions, shades of difference, fissures, and splits among factions of the ruling class and the possibility of exploiting them.

It recognizes the struggle for economic and social justice and democratic socialism passes through multiple stages, which are not neatly demarcated and often overlap.

It recognizes that at each stage key political objectives must be identified along with the necessary class and social forces needed to decisively shift the political balance of forces.

These are temporary class alliances based on momentary coinciding class interests. They invariably result in some compromises, however temporary, by the various contending class and social forces.

They are naturally unstable and unreliable allies and strictly follow their own class interests. On one issue they may be allies, and on another, foes.

Irreconcilable class antagonisms and contradictions do not disappear. The working class doesn't cease fighting for its interests or building independent organizational and political capacity, as the AFL-CIO has shown in establishing its own independent political mobilizing structure.

Left-center unity

The all-people's coalition is not based on organizing the left against the right wing. The left alone, while growing, can't defeat Trump and right-wing extremism. Broad unity of left and center political currents along with every other class and social force opposed to the right is needed.

Unity of the broad, diverse, and multi-layered people's movement – led by the multi-racial working class and organized labor – is fundamental. Its ability to influence the overall coalition depends on the extent to which it achieves broad multi-racial, multi-gender, and native-born/immigrant unity, as well as its level of engagement.

The main efforts of the left must be concentrated in building this movement at the grassroots – in all directions, as broad and deep and possible, with a focus on unity. Otherwise, the working class will be unable to play its leading role and put its imprint on the broader multi-class alliance.

Some on the left assert that the political center has collapsed and that, therefore, the concept of left-center unity no longer applies.

However, even with increasing polarization, recent polls showed about one-third of the electorate and 38 percent of Democrats identify as political moderates.

The center forces in the Democratic Party reflecting much of the corporate establishment are still powerful, well-resourced, deeply entrenched, and they control most state and city organizations.

There is simultaneous unity and contestation taking place between the establishment and progressive wings of Democratic Party – a reflection of the disparate, contradictory class and social forces of this electoral coalition.

That doesn't mean the left should cease criticism of the center or stop opposing centrist forces when necessary. Progressive independent forces in Chicago sharply criticize Mayor Rahm Emanuel's administration's pro-corporate tendencies, policing policies, and privatization of public education. But this occurs in the context of the overall fight against Trump and the GOP. Emanuel is an ally in this fight as a supporter of the Sanctuary City movement and a defender of ACA, Medicaid, and Medicare.

The Democratic Party establishment is responding to the massive upsurge, reaching out to the progressive wing and waging a largely united, determined fight against the Trump agenda.

Center and left currents and political demands are not static and change under the impact of class and social movements and the growing mass upsurge against Trump. The changing demands of the center are the starting point for unity.

The emerging movements and shifts in public opinion and the impact of the Sanders campaign that gave voice to them all impacted the process of unity and contestation. This led to the most advanced platform of a major party in history being adopted at the Democratic National Convention last summer.

DLC/Third Way style politics have been discredited and the center has moved away from many positions, as evidenced by Clinton campaign. This shift should be welcomed, but under no circumstances should we assume center forces will give up efforts to assert their interests.

The broad left should continue advancing its agenda, developing a loose program reflecting the people's coalition led by labor. It helps influence the direction of the overall struggle.

Left attacks on the center

One left trend has concluded the Democratic Party center is responsible for the 2016 election loss. They believe the center is an obstacle to defeating Trump and that the left can defeat Trump, the GOP, and the extreme right all on its own. They see any engagement between left and center as futile.

Based on the response to the Sanders campaign, Jacobin editor Bhaskar Sunkara calls for a left-populist alternative, which he thinks is the only way to defeat right-wing extremism. Environmentalist Naomi Klein advocates either taking over the Democratic Party or founding a third party.

These approaches advocate war against the political center at a moment when center-left unity is absolutely necessary.

Today, millions are pouring into the streets on the basis of stopping Trump and defending democracy. The left current is a vital and growing part of this all-peoples movement. If its approach is geared toward building the broadest unity, it will emerge from a defeat of Trump as a stronger force capable of giving greater leadership to more advanced stages of struggle that lie ahead.


-- 
John Case
Harpers Ferry, WV

The Winners and Losers Radio Show
7-9 AM Weekdays, The EPIC Radio Player Stream, 
Sign UP HERE to get the Weekly Program Notes.

Saturday, March 11, 2017

Fwd: Malignant



Sent from my iPhone

Begin forwarded message:

From: Stewart Acuff <acuff.stewart@gmail.com>
Date: March 11, 2017 at 11:33:48 AM EST
To: Stewart <acuff.stewart@gmail.com>
Subject: Malignant

The malignant, malicious presidency didn't just begin

It's roots are not just in our lifetime

It is an ongoing struggle for what America is and when

Our America will celebrate real freedom and justice with a chime

From an eternal bell

That will loudly sound joy well

For as long as our time

Is to be.

Let us remember those who've already fought and who could see

Frederick Douglass and a Garrison who challenged a nations conscience

And Ol Abe who wandered alone through deaths awful dance

Let us remember Harriet Tubman singing out in the night--Keep On

And Susan Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton

Let us remember A. Philip Randolph and the always struggle of Black men for dignity

And Harvey Milk and the struggle still of gay and trans folks for equality

And please don't let us forget Joe Hill and Cesar Chavez and Dr. King (perhaps the greatest)

Who all remind us now

America is as just as our struggle is strong

And as free as we keep our vow

Freedom from Tyranny

Justice for All.



Sent from my iPhone

Daniel Little: Divided ... [feedly]

Divided ...
http://understandingsociety.blogspot.com/2017/02/divided.html

Why is part of the American electoral system so susceptible to right-wing populist appeals, often highlighting themes of racism and intergroup hostility? Doug McAdam and Karina Kloos address the causes of the radical swing to the right of the Republican Party in Deeply Divided: Racial Politics and Social Movements in Postwar America. Here is the key issue the book attempts to resolve:
If the general public does not share the extreme partisan views of the political elites and party activists and, more to the point, is increasingly dismayed and disgusted by the resulting polarization and institutional paralysis that have followed from those views, how has the GOP managed to move so far to the right without being punished by the voters? Our answer — already telegraphed above — is that over the past half century social movements have increasingly challenged, and occasionally supplanted, parties as the dominant mobilizing logic and organizing vehicle of American politics. (Kindle location 303-307). 
Not surprisingly given McAdam's long history in the social movements research field, McAdam and Kloos argue that social movements are commonly relevant to electoral and party politics; they suggest that the period of relatively high consensus around the moderate middle (1940s and 1950s) was exceptional precisely because of the absence of powerful social movements during these decades. But during more typical periods, national electoral politics are influenced by both political parties and diffuse social movements; and the dynamics of the latter can have complex effects on the behavior and orientation of the former.

McAdam and Kloos argue that the social movements associated with the 1960s Civil Rights movement and its opposite, the white segregationist movement, put in motion a political dynamic that pushed each party off of its "median voter" platform, with the Republican Party moving increasingly in the direction of white supremacy and preservation of white privilege.
More accurately, it is the story of not one, but two parallel movements, the revitalized civil rights movement of the early 1960s and the powerful segregationist countermovement, that quickly developed in response to the black freedom struggle. (lc 1220)
The dynamics of grassroots social movements are thought to explain how positions that are unpalatable to the broad electorate nonetheless become committed platforms within the parties. (This also seems to explain the GOP preoccupation with "voter fraud" and their efforts at restricting voting rights for people of color.) The primary processes adopted by the parties after the 1968 Democratic convention gave a powerful advantage to highly committed social activists, even if they do not represent the majority of a party's members.

This historical analysis gives an indication of an even more basic political factor in American politics: the polarizing issues that surround race and the struggle for racial equality. The Civil Rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s was a widespread mobilization of large numbers of ordinary citizens in support of equal rights for African Americans in terms of voting, residence, occupation, and education. Leaders like Ralph Abernathy or Julian Bond (or of course, Martin Luther King, Jr.) and organizations like the NAACP and SNCC were effective in their call to action for ordinary people to take visible actions to support greater equality through legal means. This movement had some success in pushing the Democratic Party towards greater advocacy of reforms promoting racial justice. And the political backlash against the Democratic Party following the enactment of civil rights legislation spawned its own grassroots mobilizations of people and associations who objected to these forms of racial progress. And lest we imagine that progressive steps in the struggle for racial justice largely derived from the Democratic Party, the authors remind us that a great deal of the support that civil rights legislation came from liberal Republicans:
The textbook account also errs in typically depicting the Democrats as the movement's staunch ally. What is missed in this account is the lengths to which all Democratic presidents—at least from Roosevelt to Kennedy—went to placate the white South and accommodate the party's Dixiecrat wing. (kl 411)
The important point is that as long as the progressive racial views of northern liberal Democrats were held in check and tacit support for Jim Crow remained the guiding—if unofficial—policy of the party, the South remained solidly and reliably in the Democratic column. (lc 1301)
So M&K are right -- issues and interests provide a basis for mobilization within social movements, and social movements in turn influence the evolution of party politics.

But their account suggests a more complicated causal story of the evolution of American electoral politics as well. M&K make the point convincingly that the dynamics of party competition by themselves do not suffice to explain the evolution of US politics to the right, towards a more and more polarized relationship between a divided electorate. They succeed in showing that social movements of varying stripes played a key causal role in shaping party politics themselves. So explaining American electoral politics requires analysis of both parties and movements. But they also inadvertently make another point as well: that there are underlying structural features of American political psychology that explain much of the dynamics of both movements and parties, and these are the facts of racial division and the increasingly steep inequalities of income and wealth that divide Americans. So structural facts about race and class in American society play the most fundamental role in explaining the movements and alliances that have led us to our current situation. Social movements are an important intervening variable, but pervasive features of inequality in American society are even more fundamental.

Or to put the point more simply: we are divided politically because we are divided structurally by inequalities of access, property, opportunity, and outcome; and the mechanisms of electoral politics are mobilized to challenge and defend the systems that maintain these inequalities.

 -- via my feedly newsfeed

Mayors See Right Through the American Health Care Act [feedly]

Mayors See Right Through the American Health Care Act
http://prospect.org/article/mayors-see-right-through-american-health-care-act

House Speaker Paul Ryan makes his case on March 9 for the GOP's repeal-and-replace plan for the Affordable Care Act.

It's difficult to underestimate the relief provided by the Affordable Care Act to American cities and their mayors. Mayors, after all, hear about local health issues from everyone—from first responders and uninsured constituents to doctors and hospital executives. As the mayors see it, Obamacare has reduced the numbers of uninsured people using hospital emergency rooms, provided the benefits of 21st-century medicine to people who never had access to it, and created thousands of jobs in metropolitan regions.

Unlike Republican members of Congress, mayors do not have luxury of fighting ideological cage matches with politicians of different persuasions until they can cudgel them into submission with an ill-advised, hastily crafted bill to replace reforms pulled together by a Democratic African American president. If Obamacare had been McCaincare or Romneycare the Sequel, the nation would be engaged in a different conversation.

Mayors, on the other hand, have to get stuff done, so facing down angry constituents in town meetings and compromising with political opponents is hard-wired into their daily existence. In a late February U.S. Conference of Mayors press conference phone call with reporters, New Orleans's Mitch Landrieu laid out the likely consequences of the Republicans' "repeal and reform" handiwork. "The message to the states and the people," he said, "is you are on your own." 

Like most mayors, Landrieu, the vice president of the U.S. Conference of Mayors, preferred a fix-and-repair strategy to deal with ACA flaws, including preservation of the Medicaid expansion that provided uninsured people with insurance and allowed health-care providers to expand programs in areas like mental health and substance abuse.

"Without a suitable replacement [we are] going to feel this at all local levels," said Boston Mayor Marty Walsh, who was also on the call.

According to Landrieu, Medicaid expansion funds support more than 50 New Orleans primary health-care clinics. More than 350,000 people have secured access to health insurance in the last year, after Louisiana expanded Medicaid.

In Boston, there has been a similar multiplier effect. Area teaching hospitals have received about $23 billion in federal funding, Walsh said. Losing those dollars would put jobs and research programs at risk. Hundreds of thousands of people in both states stand to lose coverage under the current Republican plan.

Most mayors are immersed in the finer details of budget-making and want to know what the fiscal and economic ramifications of any federal proposal are, especially one that is a major departure from previous policies. With House Republicans unwilling to wait for the Congressional Budget Office to weigh in on costs, it is not surprising that the U.S. Conference of Mayors has castigated the bill's lack of transparency on its costs and the number of people it would cover.

Where President Trump sees a proposal that "will end with a beautiful picture," the U.S. Conference of Mayors sees a plan that is "bad for cities, bad for people who live in cities and bad for people who provide healthcare in cities." But while some of the nation's Republican governors have been vocal opponents of the House plan and have likely moved the needle in the Senate, there are fewer Republican mayors who can exert comparable leverage.

The 2016 Menino Survey of Mayors found that that city leaders have developed a "partisan immunity" to many of the polarizing issues like immigration, race, health care, and poverty that that too many members of Congress view as having only one correct answer—theirs. Poverty is a problem of titanic dimensions for cities, and a national health-care policy that backpedals on Obamacare's support for coverage for the poor bodes ill for the health-care and economic challenges that mayors confront daily.

Congressional Republicans view any number of historically federal programs, most particularly health-care financing for the poor, as a state prerogative, one they argue gives patients more control over their own medical choices. Mayors, by contrast, see health care as a basic human right, not a privilege to be granted or denied depending on the whims of members of Congress or state lawmakers. Local officials fear returning to the time when poor people were compelled to rely on emergency room doctors to treat such routine ailments as flu in adults and ear infections in toddlers.

Under Speaker Paul Ryan's proposal to kill Medicaid as a guarantee of coverage to the poor, federal health dollars would flow instead into state capitals, subjecting the allocation of those funds to the kind of intrastate political wheeling and dealing that may not mesh with better health-care outcomes for residents. Even if states are controlled by progressives, the level of funding the feds would provide would be sharply reduced from those provided under the ACA.

"Everybody knows that when you give [funding] to governors, they have to parse it around the state based mostly on politics and not necessarily on science and health care," Landrieu said. Without substantial revisions to the Republican plan, mayors will find themselves hemmed in between Washington's intransigence and their state's own political turf wars.


 -- via my feedly newsfeed