[OccupyCU] The Democrats’ New Fake Populism

[David Johnson]

Weekend Edition May 30-Jun 01, 2014
<http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/05/30/the-democrats-new-fake-populism/print>
Share on facebook 
<http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/05/30/the-democrats-new-fake-populism/#> 
Share on twitter 
<http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/05/30/the-democrats-new-fake-populism/#> 
Share on google 
<http://www.addthis.com/bookmark.php?v=300&winname=addthis&pub=ra-4f60e2397d05b897&source=tbx-300&lng=en-US&s=google&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.counterpunch.org%2F2014%2F05%2F30%2Fthe-democrats-new-fake-populism%2F&title=The%20Democrats%E2%80%99%20New%20Fake%20Populism%20%C2%BB%20CounterPunch%3A%20Tells%20the%20Facts%2C%20Names%20the%20Names&ate=AT-ra-4f60e2397d05b897/-/-/538d4cc92981e689/2&frommenu=1&uid=538d4cc94b18e2a5&ct=1&pre=http%3A%2F%2Fl.facebook.com%2Fl.php%3Fu%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.counterpunch.org%252F2014%252F05%252F30%252Fthe-democrats-new-fake-populism%252F%26h%3DUAQGpbuPVAQGrGopk_W8A3rygOEomRIzvyITG2O5lHTD_lg%26enc%3DAZOkglRqRqPjtowZBD8qfFBUKVp5IORGNeCg_qB9eWCqI6BKHe8UIZ18sirAdM6PWNrnQJlW8Do99e8ZciT9PF4Ja1K3msyXDzETmKPwupnvEUMIU5SuvyfmtIC1jQA6&tt=0&captcha_provider=nucaptcha> 
More Sharing Services 
<http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/05/30/the-democrats-new-fake-populism/#> 
35 
<http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/05/30/the-democrats-new-fake-populism/#>
Left Out


  The Democrats’ New Fake Populism

by SHAMUS COOKE

It would have been hilarious were it not so nauseating. One could only 
watch <http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/23911-what-is-the-new-populism> 
the recent “New Populism” conference with pity-induced discomfort, as 
stale Democratic politicians did their awkward best to adjust themselves 
to the fad of “populism.”

A boring litany of Democratic politicians — or those closely associated 
— gave bland speeches that aroused little enthusiasm among a very 
friendly audience of Washington D.C. politicos. It felt like an amateur 
recital in front of family and friends, in the hopes that practicing 
populism with an audience would better prepare them for the real thing.

The organizers of the conference, The Campaign For America’s Future, 
ensured that real populism would be absent from the program. The group 
is a Democratic Party ally that essentially functions as a party think tank.

The two co-founders of Campaign for America’s Future are Robert Borosage 
— who works closely with the progressive caucus of the Democratic Party 
— and Robert Hickey, who works with Health Care for America Now, an 
organization that prioritized campaigning for Obamacare. On the Board of 
Directors is the notorious liberal Van Jones, no doubt carefully chosen 
for his non-threatening elitist politics.

The “new populism” seems to mistakenly believe that if Democrats merely 
advocate for a couple of “popular” ideas — as opposed to their usual 
unpopular policies that they actually implement — that they can suddenly 
transform themselves into “populists.”

The unofficial and uninspiring leader of this grouping, Senator 
Elizabeth Warren, summarized the “radical” populist platform of these 
reborn Democrat revolutionaries, doing her drab best to inject life into 
a zombie political party:

“We believe that Wall Street needs stronger rules and tougher 
enforcement, and we’re willing to fight for it.”

“We believe no one should work full-time and live in poverty, and that 
means raising the minimum wage — and we’re willing to fight for it.”

“We believe people should retire with dignity, and that means 
strengthening Social Security — and we’re willing to fight for it.”

“We believe that a kid should have a chance to go to college without 
getting crushed by debt — and we’re willing to fight for it.”

It’s true that 90 percent of Americans would agree with Warren, but the 
devil is in her lack of details. Warren’s popular platform falls 
incredibly flat because there are no concrete demands to inspire people, 
just generalizations. This important omission didn’t happen by mistake.

The Democrats simply do not want a new populist movement; rather, their 
opportunistic goal is to win elections by simply being more popular than 
the Republicans. Any of Warren’s above ideas — if they ever enter the 
halls of Congress as a bill — would be sufficiently watered down long 
before any elated response could be reached from the broader population.

How might Warren transform her ideas if she actually wanted a populist 
response? Some examples might be:

    1) – Jail the bankers who crashed the economy. Tax Wall Street
    earnings at 90% and nationalize any bank that is “too big to fail”
    in order to bring them under control.

    2) – Raise the national minimum wage to $15 an hour.

    3) – Expand Social Security by lowering the retirement age to 60, to
    be paid for by expanding payroll taxes to higher earners — who
    currently pay no Medicare and Social Security taxes on income over
    $110,000.

    4) – Free university education — to be paid for by taxing the rich
    and corporations. Eliminate crushing student debt.

Such demands would be much more likely to inspire people than what the 
“populist” Democrats are offering, and inspiration is the missing 
populist ingredient that the Democrats are organically incapable of 
provoking.

What’s preventing the Democrats from becoming inspirational? They know 
all too well that by venturing too far to the left they could easily 
instigate a real mass movement. And such a movement is not easily 
controlled and would inevitably demand much more than the 
corporate-minded Democrats are willing to concede, which, at this point, 
is virtually nothing aside from musty rhetoric.

Unlike the Republican’s populist turn to the right that created the 
now-defunct Tea Party, a true left turn would mean have the potential to 
rejuvenate the millions’ strong labor movement, while engaging tens of 
millions more into active political life, driving people to participate 
in mass marches, rallies, labor strikes and other forms of mass action.

This was what happened during the “old populism” in U.S. history, which 
the Democrats are taking their trendy namesake from. The populist 
movement of the late 1800’s was a genuine mass movement of workers and 
farmers, which briefly aligned in an independent political party, the 
People’s Party, also known as the populists.

The populist movement that included strike waves and local rural 
rebellions had nothing to do with the lifeless politics of the 
Democratic Party, and threatened the very foundation of America 
corporate power. The Democrats are keenly aware of this type of real 
populist “threat,” and they are willing to do anything to stop it.

For example, the Occupy movement proved that the Democrats fear real 
left populism much more than they fear far-right populism. We now know 
that the Obama administration worked with numerous Democratic Party 
mayors and governors across the nation to undermine and destroy 
<http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/dec/29/fbi-coordinated-crackdown-occupy> 
the Occupy movement through mass arrests, police violence and 
surveillance. And because Occupy succeeded in changing the national 
conversation about income inequality, the Democrats were forced to 
engage with the rhetoric of the movement they dismembered, and now use 
the plagiarized language as proof of their “populism.”

Aside from Elizabeth Warren, the other rock star of the “new populism” 
conference was the nominally-independent “socialist” Bernie Sanders, who 
essentially functions in Congress as a Democrat. Sanders’ politics fits 
in perfectly with the rest of the progressive caucus Democrats, which is 
why he was invited to the conference. Sanders can perhaps outdo Warren 
when it comes to anti-corporate-speak; but like Warren he keeps his 
solutions vague and his movement building aspirations negligible.

If by chance Sanders chooses to run for president as an Independent — as 
many radicals are hoping — his fake populist politics and empty rhetoric 
are unlikely to drastically change, limiting any chance that a 
“movement” may emerge.

It’s doubtful that many people have been fooled by the “left turn” of 
the Democratic Party. But on a deeper level the politics of “lesser 
evilism” still haunts labor and community groups, and keeping these 
groups within the orbit of the Democratic Party is the ultimate purpose 
of this new, more radical speechifying. Until these groups organize 
themselves independently and create their own working class political 
party, the above politics of “populist” farce is guaranteed to continue.

/*Shamus Cooke* is a social service worker, trade unionist, and writer 
for Workers Action (www.workerscompass.org 
<http://www.workerscompass.org/>). He can be reached at 
shamuscooke at gmail.com <mailto:shamuscooke at gmail.com> /

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/occupycu/attachments/20140602/1312dccb/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: printer.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 1035 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/occupycu/attachments/20140602/1312dccb/attachment.gif>