First, to print as a lead-in, Bernie’s statement from last night, which perhaps people have seen but in case:
“I congratulate Secretary Clinton on her victories tonight, and I look forward to issue-oriented campaigns in the 14 contests to come.
“I am proud that we were able to win a resounding victory tonight in Rhode Island, the one state with an open primary where independents had a say in the outcome. Democrats should recognize that the ticket with the best chance of winning this November must attract support from independents as well as Democrats. I am proud of my campaign’s record in that regard.
“The people in every state in this country should have the right to determine who they want as president and what the agenda of the Democratic Party should be. That’s why we are in this race until the last vote is cast. That is why this campaign is going to the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia with as many delegates as possible to fight for a progressive party platform that calls for a $15 an hour minimum wage, an end to our disastrous trade policies, a Medicare-for-all health care system, breaking up Wall Street financial institutions, ending fracking in our country, making public colleges and universities tuition free and passing a carbon tax so we can effectively address the planetary crisis of climate change.”
I don’t want to argue this: I’m in this to the end, as far as Bernie wants to go, and I do believe we can still win the nomination. I don’t want to debate this.
There’s something more interesting to say: We can actually, I think, defeat the entire model of so-called “free trade” by forcing this as a central position the Democratic Party will take at the convention—and a Democratic president will, then, be pressured to live by.
And if we do, it will be because of the political revolution we’ve created.
The most relevant thing Donald Trump said last night—“relevant” in the sense not completely insane, unhinged and full of hate and bile...I watch his speeches mostly to await the political train wreck combined with my sheer astonishment that this guy is not laughed off the public stage—was when he said, basically, NAFTA was a disaster for the country.
Not being religious, I await the bolt of lightening to strike me down as I say: he was exactly right.
Putting aside whether he actually believes it or it’s just another part of the mutterings and rantings of a delusional, dangerous man, that statement is both a warning sigh and a rallying cry for us. His statement was a direct rejection of the orthodoxy of the Republican Party. With the exception of a sliver of the Pat Buchanan-wing of the party, every NAFTA-type deal passed with significant, large majorities of the Republican Party, in the face of opposition to those deals by a big part, and growing over the years, part of the Democratic Party.
Whoever is the nominee of the Democratic Party better understand—and one candidate does understand this--that you can trace the revolt against the status quo and establishment politics to many horrendous policies but a flashing red light leads directly to Bill Clinton’s NAFTA and the model it created for every trade deal that followed, including the Trans Pacific Partnership.
From a purely political point of view, if the Democratic Party wants to keep the votes of a whole lot of people who live in Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, upstate New York, and a whole lot of hollowed out communities, it better take an unambiguous stand against NAFTA-style deals.
No bullshit language opposing these deals “As currently written”…
This shit is corrosive and not fixable by moving a few sentences or adding more language in the fraudulent worker and environmental “protections.” These are entirely deals structured for corporate rights. You cannot patch on, as an afterthought, some entirely useless language on workers and the environment because it’s a sham, and never works (I’ve written extensively about this issue including, ironically, when this came up during the 2008 Democratic primary contest)
So, when Bernie says “fight for a progressive party platform” this should be high on the agenda and winnable—as a matter of smart, sane, economic policy and current politics. I understand one candidate will resist taking such a stand.
But, you cannot want to fight inequality, raise wages and save the planet by having even a shred of this corporate trade agenda stink up the joint.
Tear these deals up. Drive a stake through them.
We want trade but we want trade based on rules that, first and foremost, benefit the people and the planet, not corporations.
It’s not hard.
And I think it’s worth fighting for.