Zcom_simple

Wisconsin and the Left


One Year Longer, One Year Weaker


Source: Counterpunch

Change Text Size a- | A+


There was an expression among activists that went “One year longer, one year stronger” a year after the beginning of the “Wisconsin Uprising” here in Madison, WI. The reality is that one year+ longer, the left as an organizing force is “one year weaker.”

 

The truth? People, as a mass movement in the United States, are attracted to right-wing populism, embodied by the likes of Wisconsin Republican Gov. Scott Walker, who recently won the recall election by an astounding 7-percent landslide.

 

Sure, there are refrains, such as “this was an auction, not an election,” and that “money won this election.” But people still voted and have agency. And Walker won by a long-shot.

Many important questions arise for those who consider themselves, broadly speaking, on the left: a.) Why the grassroots attraction to right-wing populism? b.) How’d the left (both liberals and leftists alike) get steam-rolled so badly? c.) What’s next for the grassroots activist of a left-leaning orientation now that, bluntly speaking and when looked at through a sober viewpoint, the cause has been so badly bludgeoned since last year’s “Uprising”?

Right-Wing Populism Explained

Many schools of thought exist as to why people of a working class background have flocked toward the Tea Party.

There’s Thomas Frank’s “What’s the Matter with Kansas?” argument, which posits that, in essence, working class people are duped by wedge issues, such as abortion and gay marriage, into voting against their economic class interests. This, of course, assumes the Democratic Party is the “party of the people.”

 

There is also the Chris Hedges’ “Death of the Liberal Class” argument, which says what he conceptualizes as the “liberal class” is dead and has lost its legitimacy among the United States’ citizenry. Another way to refer to the “liberal class” is to call it the “liberal elite.” This argument is far more compelling and complex than the Frank argument.

 

Hedges posits that long ago, liberal elites abandoned the rank-and-file of the working class, though they have continued to, in a hollow manner, speak on behalf of it. Because an untold number of people feel abandoned by liberal elites, its void has been filled by an organized and outraged right-wing populist front, argues Hedges. Hedges argues that Wall Street Democrats like President Bill Clinton and President Barack Obama serve as Exhibit A of the liberal class. I would take that a step further and say so too did Democratic Party gubernatorial candidate Tom Barrett.

Then there’s the Noam Chomsky argument, which in most ways mirrors the Hedges argument, but directly addresses the question of the Tea Party. In a speech he gave in Madison, WI in April 2010, he stated, “Ridiculing Tea Party shenanigans is a serious error, I think. It would be far more appropriate to understand what lies behind them and to ask ourselves why justly angry people are being mobilized by the extreme right and not by forces like those that did so in my childhood, in the days of formation of the CIO and other constructive activism.”

 

What Happened to the Left?

Emma Goldman had it right when she stated, “If voting changed anything, they’d make it illegal.” Labor and the left in Wisconsin committed suicide when it demobilized a legitimate grassroots movement and turned it into an electoral campaign. It has been a long, slow death.

Grassroots activists with righteous indignation gave up their agency to do that which was deemed “acceptable” to the powers that be, namely the “Union Bosses” and the Democratic Party apparatchiks. Why was a general strike never considered? Why not creative tactics to “kill the bill,” Act 10, the reason for the “Uprising” and recall to begin with? How’d this all morph into what it’s morphed into?

 

In the main, the left has failed to understand that what populist right-wing activists hate more than anything else is the Democratic Party and unions, two pillars of what Hedges defines as the “Liberal Class.”  Their hatred is justified, given that, as Hedges points out, these institutions abandoned working class people long ago. Thus, the left confused real grassroots power with the Liberal Class and are now paying the consequences.

What’s Next?

Some will say that the John Doe affair could bring the demise of Walker, keeping hope alive of a Walker unseating. Others will say it’s time to put all efforts into the Obama campaign.

But that’s all, for the most part, a grand charade for movements representing the working class.

What’s really needed?

An acknowledgement, at the very least, that the working-class grassroots in the majority of Wisconsin are attracted to right-wing populism. They see Madison (rightfully so, I’d argue) as an elitist, detached enclave 77 square miles surrounded by reality. Any left-leaning independent activism strategy that has any force, meaning and direction will have to see that these are people are allies in the fight, not people to scoff at as dumb, naive or absurd.

For now, it’s “One Year Longer, One Year Weaker,” but it doesn’t have to be like that forever. In the meantime its “Back to the drawing board,” as the old adage goes.

Steve Horn is a researcher and writer at DeSmogBlog. He is also a freelance investigative journalist. Follow him on Twitter at @Steve_Horn1022.  

Img_1430

Bullshit!

By Scipes, Kim at Jun 07, 2012 14:34 PM

I totally disagree with Steve Horn's claim that people in general are attracted to right wing populism.  He makes this claim, sounding very authoritative, but presents no evidence for it.

But it's so simple--it SOUNDS good.  However, it is wrong.

Let's be clear:  the left/progressive forces got drubbed.  No question.

There are a number of reasons--see Matthew Rothschild's excellent analysis in The Isthmus (a Madison weekly) at www.thedailypage.com/daily/article.php?article=36963 , which is the best I've seen so far.

Yes, Walker had tons of money.  Yes, the Dems peed all over themselves, didn't fight, yada yada.  The corporate media did it's usual crappy job.  Blah, blah, blah.

But what the Wisconsin Recall showed was the all-but-total failure of the leadership of the labor movement, and the type of trade unionism that has predominated in the US for over 60 years.  You question this?  Then explain why exit polls showed 38% of union households voted for Walker--even more than in 2010--and as Rothschild says, "Something is seriously wrong when with the union movement in Wisconsin when so many of its own members actually vote for the guy who's got his book on their throads."  No screaming eagle dog shit!

Labor activists have been fighting this over the past 40 years--obviously, we haven't won.  It's gut check time for us.  We're obviously not doing what we need to do to transform the labor movement.  We better get our act together.

Key to this is clear thinking, and RIGOROUS examination of OUR strengths and weaknesses, and how we're approaching the labor movement.

This stuff isn't rocket science.  But it requires us to delve into the fray with all the clear-thinking we can muster.

Simple, non-supportive claims such as Horn's are dangerous because they suggest we know what happened, and it gets us off the hook so we don't have to think anymore. 

Read Rothschild and then go back and reread Horn.  Let's stop the stupid shit.

Reply this comment

Comment_reply

583284

Re: Bullshit!

By Burke, Richard at Jun 07, 2012 16:11 PM

Kim is right to question Mr. Horn’s analysis. One factor that has emerged in all the post-recall post-mortems is that a fairly large majority of Wisconsin voters were completely against the idea of a recall under any circumstances, as well as a smaller group who believed that recalls were acceptable only if an office-holder had broken the law. While Walker may still get his comeuppance for ethics violations, at the time of the recall he had not yet been charged with any wrongdoing. This only raises questions. Even if a purely electoral strategy was the way to deal with the problem in Wisconsin, why did the the labor movement and it’s allies choose the less popular route of a recall rather than simply waiting for the November 2012 elections? Could it be that labor leaders were actually trying to dissipate the energy and enthusiasm that was aroused in February 2011 by the grassroots response to Walker?

 

This is yet another example of why it is futile to expect the Democratic party to be a vehicle of progressive change. One can now look forward to all the arguments third-party supporters will be hearing for the next few months about why, despite the fact that they are all deeply disappointed by Obama, it is vitally necessary to re-elect him. Just how bad do things have to get before the left realizes that unquestioning support for the Democratic party does nothing to advance our agenda?

Reply this comment

Recent Horn Content

Znetarticle_icon ZNet Articles
Loading_border