'Establishment' Politics
Last edited Fri Feb 5, 2016, 04:26 PM - Edit history (1)
...it's ridiculous to argue over which candidate represents the establishment. To me, a working class American, both candidates represent the establishment. They both have access to the levers of power and influence in the government and both are accountable for their actions, to some degree, while working within that political system.
I don't have any illusions that I'll be any closer than I am today to influencing the political establishment with a Pres. Sanders in charge. If Bernie Sanders becomes president, he doesn't automatically assume the role he's promoting as candidate as an opponent of the establishment. In that instance, he'll actually be the establishment that Americans will leverage their own aspirations and interests against.
Indeed, a Pres. Sanders would also be challenged to enlist the aid and support of the political establishment in carrying out his promises. That point is made more profound considering the political pressure his 'revolution' has attempted to exert in his campaign on institutions already determined to advance progressive ideals; like Planned Parenthood or the Human Rights Campaign.
Legislators, politicos, and other Democratic allies will be needed to help advance any progressive agenda into action or law. It makes no sense to engage in politics which seeks to divide these forces among themselves; among ourselves. All of the members of our Democratic coalition are challenged to reconcile their differences and unite, at some point, to advance our ideals through our political system. No one ideology is likely to prevail unchecked in our national legislature.
One thought occurred to me as I watched the candidates debate over who was a better progressive, if at all, was how relatively sparse the pool of candidates to fill positions in a Democratic administration can be when it comes to fleshing out a new government. The Obama administration rightly pulled from veterans and refugees from the Clinton administration when filling their offices; the Clinton administration relied on Carter folks. There really isn't going to be some mass exodus of 'establishment' operators and managers in the next administration, no matter which of our Democrats assume power.
That's what makes the present framing about a 'fight' against the political establishment in Washington seem so misdirected. When talking about republican opposition, it's clear and evident where their obstruction to our progressive agenda lies. When arguing against members of our own Democratic coalition, however, there isn't going to be an absolute line to draw between the politicos involved; not if there's going to be any hope of uniting behind one solution or the other.
That's made all the more evident in this primary election with all but two of the members of the Progressive Caucus Bernie Sanders founded when he was in Congress supporting his rival in this campaign; the rival most of his supporters consider less progressive than him - consider institutionally compromised against a progressive agenda by her associations, positions, and record.
I actually missed the most contentious part of the first debate (read up on it later), but the exchanges I tuned in to were an excellent demonstration of the progressiveness of our Democratic candidacies, of our Democratic agenda. Both representations represent progress toward progressive goals, and both candidates have the potential of making great changes in office.
What was striking in the debate was how much these two Democrats actually agreed on their political aspirations, if not on actual policy to bring about those changes. The further they got away from the petty and contradictory arguing about ideology, the more their individual attributes came to fore.
I was especially impressed by Sen. Sanders' defense of free trade, for example. It was a shining moment for all Americans to have their interests represented so forcefully and eloquently. That's the type of appeal which actually speaks to the aspirations of voters; so much more than these attempts to define each other outside of some political ideal.
= new reply since forum marked as read
