what does the left owe the dp?

Happened to read this op-ed from the New York Times today:

The One Democrat Joe Biden Would Be Clueless Without

I admit that it got me a little riled up. Where to begin...

When it comes to articles like this, I get that many people have a different perspective when it comes to politics. And I don't necessarily have an issue with people who make an argument that Warren-style politics are the way forward. I can understand the appeal of someone who is smart and seemingly has a plan for everything, and many of those plans fall on the progressive side of things. And I can also see why college educated professionals in particular find this approach more to their liking. I think many liberals are technocrats at heart, and there's something to be said for smart planning. I also understand the cautious appeal of reform vs. revolution. Change can be scary, and some people prefer slow, incremental changes to drastic overhauls. Nevertheless, I find it dismaying that someone like Will Wilkinson can look at everything from the history of labour movements here and around the world and their victories to serious critiques of capitalism (i.e., how the logic of capitalism creates cyclical crises, inequality, unemployment, capital accumulation, alienation, etc.) and still think socialists are "in the grip of unworkable, harebrained dogma."

From my POV, many socialists are gripped by a passionate desire to make the world a better place; and their dogma is to challenge the mechanics of a system that allows a certain, tiny class of people to not only possess the lion's share of wealth and political power, but to exploit the labour of the majority and dictate much of how society looks due to the enshrinement of property rights. There is a very real and relatively obvious antagonism between this small class of owners and the much larger class of wage-workers. When someone like Bloomberg talks about the wealth that he's earned and created and deserves to have, they always ignore the legion of workers whose labour went into creating that wealth and who often make just enough to survive. For every Jeff Bezos, there are millions of workers who work themselves to the bone every day, often missing breaks and working while sick, because they risk losing the job that they depend upon to pay for their food, rent, and other bills. Meanwhile, it's the Bloombergs and Bezos of the world who have the time, money, and pull to have the ear of politicians who are often in office because of their patronage. And the "unworkable, harebrained dogma" is that we can consciously create a more humane, rational, and egalitarian system than the one we currently have. But outside of the ideological difference between the established politics of the Democratic Party and socialists, just looking at the two candidates who are still in the race, the self-described socialist's platform (and entire political career) is far closer to the progressive Warrenism than Biden's, who has more often than not sided with the interests of corporations and wealthy elites than with workers (he's certainly taken enough of their money, that's for sure).

And when it comes to the existence of this social and political power imbalance that lies at the heart of socialist politics and their focus on organizing working people and expanding democracy into the workplace, along with a reevaluation of property rights and a host of other big structural changes, I'm honestly amazed that a connection between capitalist social relations and class dynamics and how unequal and messed up our society is isn't some most people who consider themselves left-leaning make. This is especially true considering the progress made in certain poor, underdeveloped, and politically isolated countries that have attempted an alternative mode of production. The healthcare system and medical advances in Cuba are but one example. A relatively poor and underdeveloped country that's suffered for over half a century under a US-led embargo has nevertheless created one of the best and most technologically advanced, universal healthcare systems in the world. Those kinds of examples combined with the technological and productive capabilities that we currently possess, and the gross inequality that we see (and which is statistically measurable) surely can't lead one to think that creating a system where everyone has universal access to things like education and healthcare while making the workplace more democratic and workers more in control over their own labour is "unworkable" and "harebrained." Can it?

Am I simply too naive to understand how the real world works? Or are people like David Harvey and Richard Wolff more deserving of recognition in the field of political-economy than they receive, and is the dominant narrative more propaganda than actual fact? If the latter is true, how do I get others to see that? I sometimes feel like I'm the proverbial turtle trying to explain to a fish dry land and I don’t know how to best express these ideas, experiences, and realizations. I admit that reading books like Capital can be daunting, but there are so many other, more contemporary sources that make similar points and illustrate the many contradictions in the logic of capitalism that make reforms weak and often impermanent, as well as how the logic of capitalism conditions us. For example, while we have the capacity to be both competitive and cooperative, capitalism clearly conditions people to be more competitive. Capitals compete against each other in the market for greater shares of profit, while workers compete against each other for jobs and wages. In essence, competition is incentivized, even in areas where cooperation is necessary because everyone’s job is precarious. And I'm not sure why people don't see how the priorities of capitalism aren't for working people. It's so blatantly obvious. Just one small example is how, when crises happen and markets crash, it's the markets, banks, and large corporations that get bailed out, not the workers. After the 2008 crash, banks and auto companies got giant bailouts while people underwater on their mortgages got nothing. And just the other day, the government dumped $1.5 trillion into the market while paid sick leave for workers was blocked.

I feel like I've written ad nauseum about the ways that the logic of capitalism not only causes or promotes things like cyclical crises, unemployment and low wages for many, competition over cooperation, capital accumulation and a class of owners with insane wealth and power, etc., as well as how it conditions us to think about work and money and who deserves what. And probably equally as much about how real people suffer from their lack of money, opportunity, and political power, often using myself as an example. Nearly half of the US lives at or near the real poverty line, working paycheck to paycheck with little-to-no savings, many without healthcare or unable to afford to use the plans they have. Many are in debt. Many forgo needed medical and dental care because they can't afford it. Many don’t have sick time off. Many have degrees. Of course some find the means to go on to get better educations and find good jobs with good healthcare and are relatively happy and content. And that's great. But the unworkable and harebrained dogma of the socialist is to make that a reality for everyone. Yet oftentimes I seriously wonder if my experience as a relatively smart yet non-college educated worker in three states gives me a perspective others lack, or if I'm just another uneducated prole that deserves to have others to look down at me for the ignorant things that I say and believe. And right now, I honestly don't know.

Between work, school, how much I have to struggle to make ends meet, the state of the world and the people running it, and how the world makes me feel about myself, I feel tired and defeated. I've been struggling to find a good job and live comfortably like the American Dream tells me is possible since the moment I graduated high school. And in all of that time working, between the low pay and the layoffs and work-related injuries, I've continued to struggle. And I continue to see others who struggle. And I've seen multiple crises shine a light onto the weaknesses and flaws of the current system with few also seeing the need for radical change. This one alone highlights the need for universal healthcare, childcare, and the ability of people to work from home that for some reason magically couldn't before, the need for workers to have paid time off or the ability to not work but still not starve, the ability to erase debts and suspend evictions and shut offs, and how the system looks after itself first and workers barely at all. So am I wrong? Is an alternative to what we have today a real possibility? And if so, why aren't we working harder towards it? Why is a more humane, rational, and egalitarian society such a difficult thing to imagine and bring into being? We figured out how to land on the moon and sequence the human genome, but figuring out a way to make work days shorter and childcare a free service for the collective good is some kind of pie-in-the-sky daydream?

This article is an example of how many within the DP are dismissive of or are even openly hostile to socialist politics. While they may say it's a big tent party and want leftist support, saying that socialists and anti-capitalists in general have no other option, they make it obvious they don't actually want our ideas, only our votes and money with a condescending pat on the head. And then they wonder why some on the left sit out elections or vote for third party candidates. People on the left in the US are struggling to find a home to organize in. Some find that in small, tight-nit socialist groups, while others are searching for larger political organizations to be a part of like the DSA. And others are trying to move the DP left and make it into that, but I don't know how successful they can be trying to turn a socially-liberal, reformist capitalist party into an anti-capitalist labour party, or even a social democratic one at that. Both the leadership and the corporate funders of the party are vocally opposed to it. And I wonder if many within the DP itself understand these contradictions and why they can't have it both ways, i.e., wanting leftist support while simultaneously shunning leftist ideas and policies.

As a side note, this isn't directed towards any one person as most of my friends are college educated and registered Democrats, and I respect them and their ideas, but the general debate surrounding leftist politics and their place in political discourse. I certainly don't hate anyone for their affiliation with the DP or supporting people they like despite my strong criticisms of the party and many of its leaders. But there's definitely a degree of incompatibility between leftist politics and the politics of the DP, something even the DP leadership has vocally affirms. I don't mind being outside of it because it doesn't represent me and the party as a whole doesn't really want me or my politics. At the same time, I'm basically told my ideas are unworkable and unwelcome, but I still need to give them my vote just because they might lose otherwise. But my time, energy, money, and vote aren't owed to them just because they're not Republicans. Those things are earned by sincere discussions and policies that help working people. As a general rule, if you're fighting against what I view to be the minimal, social democratic measures needed by working people like medicare for all, a green new deal, student debt forgiveness, etc., I'm going to have a difficult time supporting you. If you tell me that my politics are unworkable and my ideas harebrained, I'm going to have a difficult time supporting you. And if you don't take the side of workers against the owners and controllers of capital, even if you're good on social issues, I'm going to have a difficult time supporting you. And I hope that they can understand that without taking it personally, because I'm supporting things that I believe will ultimately benefit all of us, not just me.

Tl; dr: Workers organizing and pushing for change > capital doing what's right. Revolution in values and economics > small reforms to deal with inequality and the threat of climate change. I'm either an idiot or I see a different POV that's valid. If you want my support, earn it.