Read on Twitter
The November 3rd coalition against Trump is notable for its breadth—and its standard-bearer Biden is notable for his personification, both real and imagined, of the most varied programs.
Contrast with:
https://vientosur.info/el-bonapartismo-de-trump/">https://vientosur.info/el-bonapa...
Contrast with:
https://vientosur.info/el-bonapartismo-de-trump/">https://vientosur.info/el-bonapa...
This fact, together with the more restricted nature of the Trumpian reactionaries& #39; social support, reflected already four years ago in their path to victory by less than 80,000 votes in three states (MI, WI, and PA), once again casts doubt on easy Bonapartist comparisons.
Rather than another round of "superficial historical analogies" (Marx)—recall also the recent discussions of "our 1905" where some identified the latest protests with the Russian Revolution of 1905—the circumstances of the modern class struggle must be firmly grasped.
Central among these circumstances: the imperialist stage, the declining post-WWII order, and the collapse of the Soviet-led revisionist bloc. Within them, the roles are distributed and history is made in the absence, for now, of the revolutionary proletariat.
For hundreds of state functionaries, former generals and admirals included, Biden represents a more coherent and forward stance against Russia and China, likely with appeals for further "anti-free rider" concessions from Europe within the renewal of US-European relations.
For the neocons, Biden means an appreciation for "the world America made," the resumption of the full ideological stock of American interventionism (democracy, human rights ...) following the temporary aberration of "let& #39;s make a deal."
For Wall Street, he signifies the return of a friendly and familiar figure. For leading American CEOs, the restoration of the best possible political conditions for profitability amid the pandemic.
For liberals, long-awaited relief after the Mueller and impeachment debacles: an extension of the midterm win of the House and a turn to tackling the problem of the Trumpian-Federalist judiciary.
For organized labor, a seat at the table. If one looks hard enough, forgetting his record and putting an objectivist accent on events, maybe even glimpses of a profile in outline form of an FDR. (After all, who could have predicted the trajectory of the New Deal in 1932?).
For the supporters of Bernie Sanders, a bitter disappointment, but a necessary vehicle to combat "the most dangerous president" in modern history, plus the prospect of token influence and the anticipation of coming demographic shifts.
(More so than any discrepancy of the Sanders reform program with the demands of imperialist society, it was the slimness of Trump& #39;s 2016 victory that fixed DP calculations to stay the course and hand the job from Obama& #39;s Secretary of State to Obama& #39;s VP.)
Finally, to catalogue the socialists and Communists calling for a vote for Biden, who are inconsequential on the political stage but serve for revolutionary Marxists as registers of the ideological and political crisis of US Communism:
There are the usual groups, both modern revisionist and former & #39;pro-Chinese& #39; elements, who—of course—see Nov 3rd as a contest between a Biden program of & #39;democracy& #39; vs. Trumpian reaction (authoritarianism, right-wing populism, "the New Confederacy," neofascism, fascism, etc.).
And, a few new additions this year to the broad front: some left Shachtmanites, the historical grouping of Nelson Peery, and ... the Avakianites.
Reviewing their literature, one is hard pressed to find any reflection on the foreign affairs dimension of the race and the implications of the (purely imagined) Popular Front in that light—even if only to relegate this aspect to secondary importance for the sake of consistency.
Everyone knows that it is in the foreign sphere that the power of the executive is truly concentrated—indifference here indicates lack of seriousness.
The question in November will be whether this vast assembled camp, largely coastal and urban, can defeat the relatively compact Trumpian nationalists in contests in a small number of states, as well as in a possible struggle for power in a constitutional crisis.
On the other side, Trump& #39;s hold over the GOP rests on his relation to a largely rural and suburban electorate, among whom are evangelicals, paleocon remnants, right-wing militia, far-rightists including of the fascist type, plus local police throughout the country.
What escaped the polls in 2016 is more of a conscious fact in 2020: due to various circumstances—including the typical national abstention of 50%—the petty bourgeoisie and the labor aristocracy of the Rust Belt are equipped with a king-making power.
In 2016, this was the Nader effect transferred to social classes: the representation of petty-bourgeois revolt in a winner-take-all presidential system -negatively- by the denial of victory.
Whether the win that was promised in 2016 will be achieved in 2020 is what is at stake.
The work of Communists lies elsewhere.
The work of Communists lies elsewhere.
