Michael Kazin is a professor of history at Georgetown University, a co-editor of Dissent Magazine, and, no doubt, fancies himself a great champion of The People. In Sunday’s NYT Review section, he spends nearly a full page stroking his chin and asking the question, “Whatever Happened to the American Left?” Here’s how he frames the question:
America’s economic miseries continue, with unemployment still high and home sales stagnant or dropping. The gap between the wealthiest Americans and their fellow citizens is wider than it has been since the 1920s.
And yet, except for the demonstrations and energetic recall campaigns that roiled Wisconsin this year, unionists and other stern critics of corporate power and government cutbacks have failed to organize a serious movement against the people and policies that bungled the United States into recession.
Instead, the Tea Party rebellion — led by veteran conservative activists and bankrolled by billionaires — has compelled politicians from both parties to slash federal spending and defeat proposals to tax the rich and hold financiers accountable for their misdeeds.
Kazin, as a historian, recalls the left-populist response to the Great Depression (particularly union organizing) in the ’30s, and poses the question: why, in the face of economic distress, is the most influential grass roots populism today coming from the right and not the left?
It’s a useful question to ask, particularly in the pages of a corporate outlet like the Times which is disinclined to pay much attention to left organizing, and whose readers may have occasionally noted its absence. But Kazin’s essay has two rather glaring problems: first, he seems to assume that because it is not influencing public policy, there isn’t any meaningful activism on the left these days. Secondly, even within that flawed premise, he never bothers to answer his own question.
According to Kazin, the roots of today’s left ennui lie in post-war prosperity, and identity politics:
The quarter century of growth and low unemployment that followed World War II understandably muted appeals for class justice on the left. Liberals focused on rights for minority groups and women more than addressing continuing inequalities of wealth.
Let’s set aside Kazin’s rather insulting assumption that there was (and is) no economic component to the struggle for equal rights for women and non-whites. He pivots into tracing the rise of the right instead, and describes it like this:
One reason for the growth of the right was that most of those in charge of the government from the mid-1960s through the 2000s — whether Democrats or Republicans — failed to carry out their biggest promises. Lyndon Johnson failed to defeat the Viet Cong or abolish poverty; Jimmy Carter was unable to tame inflation or free the hostages in Iran; George W. Bush neither accomplished his mission in Iraq nor controlled the deficit.
…Conservatives built an impressive set of institutions to develop and disseminate their ideas. Their think tanks, legal societies, lobbyists, talk radio and best-selling manifestos have trained, educated and financed two generations of writers and organizers. Conservative Christian colleges, both Protestant and Catholic, provide students with a more coherent worldview than do the more prestigious schools led by liberals. More recently, conservatives marshaled media outlets like Fox News and the editorial pages of The Wall Street Journal to their cause.
The Tea Party is thus just the latest version of a movement that has been evolving for over half a century…[The] argument about the evils of big government has, by and large, carried the day.
I’ll pass on the temptation to nitpick here (since when is a worldview predicated on denying objective reality “more coherent”?), because there are some really serious omissions from this retelling of history. They’re the same omissions Kazin leaves out when he gets to his inevitable advice for reviving the left:
When progressives achieved success in the past, whether at organizing unions or fighting for equal rights, they seldom bet their future on politicians. They fashioned their own institutions — unions, women’s groups, community and immigrant centers and a witty, anti-authoritarian press — in which they spoke up for themselves and for the interests of wage-earning Americans.
Today, such institutions are either absent or reeling. With unions embattled and on the decline, working people of all races lack a sturdy vehicle to articulate and fight for the vision of a more egalitarian society. Liberal universities, Web sites and non-governmental organizations cater mostly to a professional middle class and are more skillful at promoting social causes like legalizing same-sex marriage and protecting the environment than demanding millions of new jobs that pay a living wage.
A reconnection with ordinary Americans is vital not just to defeating conservatives in 2012 and in elections to come. Without it, the left will remain unable to state clearly and passionately what a better country would look like and what it will take to get there. To paraphrase the labor martyr Joe Hill, the left should stop mourning its recent past and start organizing to change the future.
That’s it. That’s the wisdom Kazin takes nearly a full page to disseminate: don’t trust politicians. (Isn’t that what the right says, too?) Create your own institutions. Connect with “ordinary Americans” (which apparently don’t include either the professional middle class or people who, in the age of climate change, care about the environment). Start organizing!
Hey, what a great idea! Organizing!!! Why didn’t we think of that! No wonder conservative ideology has such a stranglehold on the country – those crafty buggers organized! I guess while activists are camping out on Wall Street and planning a mass encampment next month in Washington, while thousands of people have gotten arrested protesting the tar sands pipeline (with solidarity actions around the world), while progressives were donating and organizing in record numbers to get Barack Obama elected in 2008, or when literally millions of people mobilized to stop the invasion of Iraq and up to hundreds of thousands at a time showed up for numerous subsequent demonstrations, and millions more agitated for immigration reform, it’s never even occurred to any of us that we should be organizing instead!
Jesus H. Christ.
Even within Kazin’s specific focus on economic issues, his analysis is facile beyond belief. There are literally hundreds of thousands of people in this country who devote the bulk of their time to trying to create a more economically fair country and world. There are thousands of groups – church groups, labor groups, cultural groups, educational groups, political groups – trying to do what Kazin thinks would be a really swell idea. It would have been quite helpful for Kazin’s audience, which may only be vaguely aware of how much grass roots activity really is out there, in every community in this country, if he had at least acknowledged that an awful lot of people are already trying their very best to do exactly what he recommends.
The real question isn’t why the “American left” doesn’t exist; it’s why it has so little traction or influence. “What happened to the American left?” is a question that can’t be answered without enumerating some of the many factors that have suppressed its popularity and efficacy. And on this, Kazin is painfully silent. Let’s count some of the ways: 1) A complete disconnect, on numerous issues (including almost all economic ones), between what polls say the American people support and what lawmakers of either party are willing to champion as public policy; 2) The widespread belief, as a result, that public officials don’t listen to ordinary people, and so many people think their efforts would be a waste of time; 3) Corporate media that ignores any public organizing on a policy preference that isn’t championed by one of the major parties, and that in particular ignores left organizing as “not news”; 4) Six decades and counting of laws that make it more difficult for unions to organize than in any other industrialized country in the world; 5) The painful lack of money available to support independent media, liberal think tanks, mainline (as opposed to evangelical) church groups, the people needed to staff them all, and all the other alternative institutions Kazin would like to see created (while the right invests heavily in such things); 6) The longer hours and higher stress of the job(s) the average person has to work, leaving less time and energy for volunteer work…
I can keep going. But you get the idea.
Kazin could have written a very useful essay examining the disconnect between American popular opinion and public policy; or looking at the factors which limit the growth and influence of left institutions; or even promoting the success stories, of organizations and campaigns that have worked. (There are entire publications dedicated to publicizing what works.)
Instead, Kazin used rare space in one of the most widely read newspapers in the country to reinforce readers’ perceptions that the American left, in effect, doesn’t exist, and that there’s nobody to blame but the left itself. For somebody who claims to want to see progressives have more influence in our country, he does a fine job of reinforcing the corporate media narrative that progressives are irrelevant.
IIRC, you are not paid to write op eds that upset the status quo, but to reinforce it.
In the late 1970’s there appeared a noticeable movement by the corporate, cultural, and religious Right to gain control of local political organizations. Their purpose was manifold, first to organize a political party (within a party, the GOP), second to use this party to spearhead their agendas. They were smarter than the progressives who thought that cultural and political changes could be forced from the top down, and it is to our everlasting shame that we progressives thought that all we had to do was win a SCOTUS case to end racism, poverty, hunger, and intolerance. We progressives got soft and thought we had won the battle of the hearts and minds of the American people by judicial fiat.
The Right knew better, set to work and organized. They knew that all politics was local, that US senators come from US congressmen that congressmen came from state government legislatures and these came from local political organizations. So they took to building their base at the lowest levels of collective actions. Whether it was the local school board, the county health board, the local zoning board, county district attorneys, county commissioners, and mayors, etc., all of these became the battleground for the religious and secular Right.
They have succeeded beyond their wildest dreams. What stands before us now is a cadre of well trained, well funded Rightwing conservatives who are placed throughout the breadth and width of the political landscape and exert influence at each choke point for progressive causes.
There is no getting a round the 10 ton elephant in the road which we describe as elective democracy (or what’s left of it) in America. There is no other manner to affect substantial and sustained change other than the ballot box. Talk of marches is fine for it does galvanize the masses, but what happens AFTER you march, and more importantly after the second Tuesday of November 2012.
I see no reason why progressive minded people cannot do with the Democratic Party what the secular and religious Right have done with the GOP. It will take a concerted effort to run progressives for local political offices and such candidates will necessarily be those who are active communitarians beforehand and are known locally in the community as volunteers and “good people” who serve the community.
When you get beaten in a contest, it is wise to consider the enemy’s strategies if they are successful, and we progressives might want to re-read Sinclair Lewis’ “Babbitt” to see that active participation in community social organizations like the Rotary Club, the Elks, the Shriners, the local Chamber of Commerce, and others leads to local political power. I recognize that most progressives are by nature independent and usually are not “joiners,” but I believe that such a methodical positioning of progressives in these places of public influence is the most rational and effective long term way to move our agendas to the forefront of public discussion.
I recall vividly the answer Barry Goldwater gave to a question in 1984 when asked if the Reagan landslide that November proved the power of conservatives. He replied that one often finds the seed of their victory in a prior defeat, and conversely the one can find the seeds of their future defeat in the blossom of a current victory.
The secular and religious Right have taught us how to obtain profound influence over public policy. We must not dismiss this lesson. Instead, we must, as Goldwater mentioned, use the example of the success of the Right in these situations as the seeds for their own defeat by following their course of local social penetration to alter American culture for progressive ends.
I see no other way to succeed, even with the massive amounts of money aligned against us.
It will be a Long March. Success will not occur overnight. We will lose national elections again. But we can build a national “organism” of progressive culture that reaches into the every neighborhood, hamlet, and town in America. And we will have to do it ourselves, because neither a messiah nor a heroic man on a white horse will bring about sustained change.
If people think that voting is the end all of a representative democracy then they have no understanding of this great experiment in the human experience we call America.
What I will do, what I will continue to do is work in my community to make it better. Whether volunteering at the food bank, doing rescue work for the local Humane Society, acting as a gadfly at local government meetings, and calling, writing, visiting, and emailing my government representatives to let them know what I think they should be doing; all entail community activism that does not cease after the second Tuesday of November 2012.
We may lose elections, but we if we sustain our hope for a better day, we will never be defeated.
btw Reconsider laughing at George Herbert Walker Bush’s rhetoric of “a thousand points of light,” because it has lit up the Republican Party for more than a decade.
Excellent post, Booman. Thanks.
Just as a matter of analysis, when you “count the ways” the power of the American left has been suppressed, this is the one that stands out to me:
“Six decades and counting of laws that make it more difficult for unions to organize than in any other industrialized country in the world.”
I don’t know what to do about it, but I’m increasingly convinced that the EFCA (or something like it) would be the single most important change to help stabilize and rebuild progressive power in the US.
this one is by Geov. But, yes, it’s excellent.
Oops, sorry about that Geov. (I’ve been enjoying your front page status; keep it up!) Thanks for the correction, Booman.
I think you have confused organizing with activism. Of your examples, only the Obama campaign and some immigration reform efforts count as true organizing — in other words, they involved mobilization of large numbers as part of a planned strategy to effect actual change in law or government.
The rest are simply expressions of discontent, or attempts to swing public opinion, with no plan beyond that for how to achieve the stated end. Activism has a role, but it’s not the same as organizing.
Not a word about the media’s role in all of this?
Not in Kazin’s article…understandably so, since he is writing in a mass media newspaper that is the epitome of faux-“left”…but not in this post, either.
The American mass media do not cover “leftist” movements, except of course to diss and minimize them. In fact, the media do not cover anything that is not partial to corporate aims, be it from the left or from the right. I am still not sure on which part of the left-right spectrum Ron Paul resides, but the ongoing non-coverage of his success with on-the-street, non-aligned voters is a perfect example of this.
Once again, the 500 pound gorilla sitting in the corner scribbling into a notebook is not even mentioned. It’s as if America has a vast blind spot, one that makes it impossible to see the role of the media in its own problems. The media have become the canvas upon which the map of America is painted, and we all take that map for the reality of the situation.
It is not. Only stepping away from the media works to clear up his misconception, and I strongly suggest that we all go on a media strike (or at the very least a regular media fast) now, before it’s too late.
Get out of the TV/computer-dominated house, out of the car with its newsradio on, out of the mass transit with its newspaper headlines. Take your headphones playing mass-produced plastic music out of your ears, walk the streets and look around!!!
The media is a vast conspiracy of lies.
Wake up to this fact.
Wake the fuck up!!!
AG
Just curious Arthur Gilroy, having woken up, what do you do next?
Damned if I know. I can take care of my own business and I can try to talk sense to others, but past that? I really don’t know. I do know that I have seriously “woken up” a number of people who are close to me about how things work here in Omertica, but as far as big, broad efforts that might promise to have some real effect? The media themselves dictate what gets heard here and what doesn’t…again, Ron Paul’s present non-personhood being just the latest in a long line of media mutings…and there is no way in hell that they are going to cover any movement that wishes to stop their hypnotrancing power.
Catch 22 squared. Cubed, even.
Catch 10,648, over and out.
So it goes.
But I do keep trying.
Later…
AG
Thanks for the reply. Best of luck with your efforts.
I’d just emphasize the importance of one point from above: the importance of building and sustaining institutions: the AFL-CIO, the NAACP, NOW, the Institute for Policy Studies, churches, temples, mosques, etc. If you’re feeling frustrated by your lack of power, find an institution (or start one!) of people who share your goals and are willing to take action together.
P.S. For those who think the media is key, one advantage of having your own institutions is the ability to create your own media.
Granted, listing it as one of many examples doesn’t highlight the really central role media has played in stupefying this country – we don’t disagree on that – but I did include it. And there are plenty of other countries where the state and/or oligarchy controls the media and people organize effectively anyway, so it’s hardly the only factor.
Is it not the case that in most other country’s with controlled media the people are aware that it is controlled?
In the US, I think most people believe the media is not controlled and they believe the right leaning messages they are hearing are a truely reflect broad public sentiment.
Rolled into discussions (or lack there of) of the role of media in the both real and apparent lack of loud voices and strong organizations on the Left is another missing component, which is that of concerted attack.
Successful organizations do not simply disappear for no apparent reason. It’s not as if “the Left” (unions, civil rights orgs, women’s rights orgs, environmental orgs, and so on) simply got bored and one day decided to pack it in a start day trading on their laptops…
The Left in its various incarnations and with its multitude of facets has been under concerted, vicious, sometimes brutal but always focused attack from some of the most powerful, wealthy, politically connected individuals and organizations for its entire existence.
After successes in the 20’s through the 40’s (embodied in many ways by the CIO), the Left simply started to get smashed. Forced purges of so-called communists, expulsions of unions that refused to purge, absorption of the CIO back into the AFL and crushing of the activist model. Gutting of various labor laws and boards.
The list is very long and certainly not limited to unions… COINTELPRO comes to mind. PATCO comes to mind.
One could argue that the single uniting principle of the US ruling class (that includes Dems and Repubs, btw) has been elimination of the US Left as a player in national or local politics.
By any means necessary, under any circumstances, no matter the collateral harm… the Left is the first and most important target.
One might even extend that argument to suggest that while there were certainly strongly defended reasons for the onset of the Cold War, that “war” quickly morphed into a concerted, long-term attack on the Left by all the forces of Capital and (by extension) the government and its apparatus.
OH yes!!!
Precisely.
Thank you, sir.
AG
In Kazin’s defense, he political Left is in a long-term secular waning trend right across the industrialized world. Look at Labour, or the SPD, or Scandinavia. No more Clause IV, no plans for the public ownership of the commanding heights, no Meidner Plan…