0:00

You're listening to Class, an official

0:02

podcast of the Democratic Socialists

0:04

of America National Political Education

0:07

Committee. My name is Elton lk.

0:10

Today we have another bonus episode.

0:13

This episode is a debate between National

0:15

Political Education Committee members,

0:18

Luke Pickrell and Jerry Harris

0:21

on their understanding of democracy, whether

0:23

the constitution supports. Or

0:25

frustrates democracy and

0:28

to what extent socialists should quote,

0:30

fight for or defend

0:33

democracy. Going into the 2024

0:36

presidential election, it

0:38

was recorded January 27th

0:40

of this year, which is 2024. Luke

0:43

has written in Cosmonaut and the Democratic

0:46

Constitution blog and contributed

0:48

to various discussions in the Why

0:51

Marx project. Jerry

0:54

is the National Secretary of

0:56

the Global Studies Association on

0:58

the International Board of the Network for

1:00

Critical studies of Global Capitalism.

1:04

He is a retired union activist

1:06

with over 120

1:09

published articles on political

1:11

economy, globalization,

1:13

democracy, and other topics.

1:16

His last book was Global

1:18

Capitalism and the Crisis of Democracy.

1:23

Okay, welcome everyone. Welcome

1:25

to our event, Democracy in the United

1:27

States. It's going to be a debate leading

1:29

up to November. This is

1:32

part of the National Political Education Committee's

1:34

events that we do. My name is Sarah Callahan

1:37

and I'm on the steering committee for NPAC.

1:39

Um, this is our first event where we have reached out

1:42

to caucuses. So thank you for everyone

1:44

who turned out their members to this event. I'm

1:46

just gonna read like a really short blurb about their

1:48

event. So,

1:51

in the Communist Manifesto, Mark and Engels

1:53

wrote that the first step in the revolution

1:55

by the working class is to raise the proletariat

1:58

to the position of ruling class, to

2:00

win the battle of democracy. Almost

2:03

two centuries later, the battle for democracy

2:05

continues today. Economic

2:07

precarity and social upheaves have

2:09

led many to question our present political

2:11

systems. And these times DSA's

2:14

position that the United States is no democracy

2:16

at all is arousing and powerful assertion

2:18

against mainstream narratives. And

2:21

this event, DSA members Jerry

2:23

Harris and Luke Pickle will discuss

2:26

their understanding of democracy, whether the constitution

2:28

supports or frustrates democracy, and

2:30

to what extent socialists should fight for

2:33

or defend democracy going into the 2024

2:36

presidential elections. First,

2:38

I'm going to introduce Jerry Harris, who

2:40

is the National Secretary of the Global Studies Association

2:43

and on the International Board of the Network

2:45

of Critical Studies of Global Capitalism.

2:48

He is a retired union activist with over

2:50

120 published articles on political

2:53

economy, globalization, democracy,

2:55

and other topics. His works

2:58

have been translated into Spanish, Portuguese,

3:00

Czech, German, and Chinese. His last

3:03

book was Global Capitalism and the Crisis

3:05

of Democracy. And the next

3:07

I'm going to introduce Luc Picquerel, who

3:10

is a member of East Bay DSA and a member

3:12

of Marxist Unity Group. He's written Cosmonaut

3:14

in the Democratic Constitution blog and

3:16

contributed to various discussion in the Why

3:18

Marx Project. He's also

3:21

interviewed or co interviewed several people

3:23

for Cosmopod about democracy in

3:25

the U. S. Constitution. So

3:27

I'm going to jump in and I'm going to have Luke

3:30

and Jerry both do a presentation for

3:32

15 minutes, starting with Luke. Luke, if

3:34

you want to go ahead. Yeah, thanks Sarah.

3:36

Thanks everyone for coming

3:38

out and joining us this evening. I'm

3:40

looking forward to the discussion. So,

3:44

I'll leap right into it. Democracy

3:46

and the U. S. Constitution are

3:49

the most critical topics that

3:51

are facing the American left today.

3:54

And the Constitution always

3:56

shapes our lives, but awareness

3:58

of its power. I think is really

4:00

heightened during presidential elections.

4:03

And of course, when you know it, this is an

4:06

election year this

4:08

year, uh, the democratic, uh,

4:10

democratic party's message is clear. Trump

4:13

is an aspiring dictator. The

4:15

magnet movement is, is fascist

4:18

and only a vote for Joe, for

4:20

Joe Biden will neutralize the bad guys.

4:23

And that's only because the Democrats, only

4:26

the Democrats will defend democracy,

4:28

maintain the guardrails of the constitution

4:31

and ensure that the sun keeps rising each

4:33

morning. So

4:36

this afternoon, I want to make three

4:38

broad arguments. Each

4:41

one of those arguments really goes under the

4:43

umbrella of what I'm going to call democratic republicanism.

4:47

The first argument I want to make is that contrary

4:49

to what Biden says. The U. S.

4:52

is not a democracy. The

4:54

second argument I'm going to make is that we should

4:56

care that we don't live in a democracy.

4:59

And the third argument is that the theory

5:02

of classical Marxism, which

5:04

is everything prior to the Bolsheviks

5:06

establishing a one party state, Along

5:09

with the history of the Civil Rights Movement

5:11

and the history of Students for a Democratic

5:14

Society or SDS. All

5:16

that has a lot to offer, uh,

5:18

what we need, which is a mass democratic

5:21

socialist movement in this country.

5:25

Democratic Republicanism is

5:28

one of three perspectives on

5:30

the American left. Those

5:32

other two perspectives are what I'm going

5:34

to call an electoral perspective

5:37

and a socialist perspective. And

5:41

these two other struggles, they

5:43

really put democracy on the back

5:45

burner. I'm going to dive into that

5:47

a little bit here. So,

5:50

the electoral strategy, the electoral

5:53

perspective, says that democracy is

5:55

the ability to vote. Because

5:57

of that, the U. S. is more or

5:59

less democratic. And

6:01

therefore, the best strategy is to work through

6:04

the three branches of government that we have to

6:07

enact progressive laws. Doubt,

6:11

however, can grow within the electoral

6:14

camp when legislation runs

6:16

into the brick wall of the Senate. And

6:18

so, for example, one senator, Joe

6:21

Manchin, Joe Manchin represents

6:23

a really minuscule percentage of the entire

6:25

U. S. population. That one person

6:27

can stop Biden's Strip Down,

6:30

Build Back Better Act. That's a good example of

6:33

running into the brick wall of the Senate. Hard

6:36

work. can really start to feel

6:38

Sisyphean. You roll

6:41

the rock up to the top of the hill only to

6:43

watch the rock roll right back down. People

6:46

might start thinking about uncapping

6:49

the house, abolishing the filibuster,

6:52

putting term limits on supreme court

6:54

justices, and maybe

6:56

getting rid of the electoral college. That's

7:00

one perspective. The socialist

7:02

perspective Also downplays

7:05

the importance of the constitution. Uh,

7:08

there are more critical things to consider

7:10

than the law and bourgeois

7:12

democracy. There

7:14

are a lot of different positions that

7:16

fall under the socialist umbrella, but I'd

7:19

argue that all pretty much believe that a socialist

7:21

revolution is needed to realize

7:24

democracy and that the way

7:26

to bring about this revolution is by spreading

7:28

socialist consciousness. And

7:30

really supporting anything that builds the

7:32

class struggle. Political

7:36

agitation within this perspective

7:38

is linking every problem to

7:40

capitalism, and really

7:42

linking every solution to socialism.

7:46

The best political strategy then is

7:49

to either ignore politics

7:52

and build working class power, use

7:55

the political arena to spread

7:57

the good news of socialism, or

7:59

somehow combine the two. In

8:04

contrast to those two perspectives, then,

8:06

democratic republicanism says that the

8:09

working class must first win the

8:11

battle for democracy. That

8:13

a democratic revolution is

8:15

needed to realize socialism. That

8:18

democracy is defined as complete

8:20

and unobstructed political rule by

8:23

the people. And that

8:25

a democratic state is one in which

8:27

total lawmaking power is

8:29

vested in a unicameral legislature

8:31

elected by universal and equal suffrage.

8:35

So those are the three perspectives in

8:38

a democratic state. The principle

8:40

of one person and one equal vote is

8:43

supreme. And Victor

8:45

Berger actually, I think, described this principle

8:47

really well to his American audience

8:50

in 1911, Berger

8:52

said that the Senate Thank you very much. Is,

8:54

and then this is a long quote, is

8:56

an obstructive and a useless body,

8:59

a menace to the people's liberty and an

9:01

obstacle to social growth. All

9:04

legislative power will be vested in the House

9:06

of Representatives. Its enactments

9:09

subject to a referendum will

9:11

be the Supreme Law and

9:13

the president shall have no power to veto them,

9:15

nor will any court have the power to

9:17

invalidate them. That's

9:20

Victor Berger, a socialist. putting

9:22

forward what needs to happen in order to make

9:24

the state democratic. Where

9:29

does democratic republicanism come

9:31

from? This perspective that I think we

9:33

need to put forward. The theoretical roots

9:36

are in Tom Paine's Common Sense, also

9:39

his Rights of Man and his dissertation

9:41

on the first principles of government. They're

9:44

also in the Pennsylvania Constitution

9:46

of 1776. They're

9:49

also in the French Revolution's Declaration

9:51

of the Rights of Man and Citizens and

9:54

the Constitution of 1793.

9:57

And also Mary Wollstonecraft's Rights

9:59

of Women, the

10:02

theoretical roots are also in the British People's

10:04

Charter of 1838, and

10:07

also in Babouf's Manifesto of the Equals,

10:11

and what I really want to emphasize

10:13

is that Marx and Engels grabbed hold

10:15

of those roots, and that's

10:17

seen in texts like The Principles of Communism,

10:20

and The communist manifesto and

10:22

the critique of the draft German social

10:24

democratic program that was

10:27

published in 1891, just

10:30

as important, this theory of democratic

10:32

republicanism lives on within

10:35

the socialist movement after their deaths.

10:38

That could be seen in Kautsky's The Republic

10:40

and Social Democracy in France, Luxemburg's

10:44

Theory and Practice, the 1903

10:47

Russian Social Democratic Labor Party program,

10:50

and then also the American Socialist Party's

10:52

Platform of 1912. In

10:56

the United States, in this country, the struggle

10:58

for democracy was really driven

11:00

back underground by the counter

11:02

revolution against Reconstruction. Now

11:06

I want to take a few quotes from some

11:08

of those sources. So from

11:10

Tom Paine, Tom Paine

11:13

says that the true and only true basis

11:15

of representative government is equality

11:17

of rights. Every man

11:19

has a right to one vote and no more

11:22

in the choice of representatives. From

11:25

Marx, Marx says the first step in the revolution

11:27

by the working class is to raise

11:29

the proletariat to the position of ruling

11:31

class, to win the battle

11:33

of democracy. Engels,

11:36

writing just a few years before his death, Engels

11:38

says, Marx and I for 40 years

11:41

repeated ad nauseum that for us

11:43

the democratic republic is the only

11:46

political form in which the struggle

11:48

between the working class and the capitalist

11:50

class can first be universalized

11:53

and then culminate in the decisive

11:55

victory of the proletariat. From

11:59

the party of the Socialist Party of America,

12:01

excuse me, the program of the Socialist Party of

12:03

America, we got the idea of abolishing

12:05

the Senate and the president's veto power,

12:08

electing the president and vice president by

12:10

direct vote, and abolishing

12:12

the Supreme Court's power of judicial

12:14

review. So

12:17

recently, a few historians have rediscovered

12:19

the centrality of democracy to Lenin's

12:22

political thought. If

12:24

you're willing to fight for political freedom,

12:27

Lars Lee wrote in 2005, you

12:30

were Lenin's ally, even if you were hostile

12:32

to socialism. If you downgraded

12:34

the goal of political freedom in any way, you were

12:37

Lenin's foe. Even if you

12:39

were a committed socialist, Lee

12:42

had read Neal Harding and Neal Harding

12:44

in 1977 wrote that according

12:46

to Lenin, workers didn't have to

12:48

come to socialist consciousness to

12:51

acquire political consciousness. And

12:55

then Neal Harding worked contemporaneously

12:57

with Hal Draper and Hal Draper did

12:59

his part, a very important part, in

13:01

debunking the myth of an undemocratic

13:04

Lenin. And

13:06

one of the things I want to emphasize today is that everything

13:09

I've just presented so far, all this theory,

13:11

this is almost all the theory and the history

13:13

that's needed for a mass democratic

13:15

socialist movement in the U. S. Any

13:21

propagandist and agitator, wrote

13:23

Lennon, must find the best means

13:26

of influencing any given audience

13:28

by presenting a definite truth in

13:31

such a way as to make it most convincing,

13:33

most easy to digest, most

13:35

graphic, and most strongly

13:37

impressive. So

13:40

today, here I am talking with you all, my

13:42

audience is Jerry, and of

13:44

course you all, any other DSA members

13:46

listening, which I hope includes

13:49

Bhaskar Sankara, Eric Blanc,

13:51

Chris Maisano, and Seth Ackerman.

13:54

These are folks, publishers, and writers

13:56

for Jacobin who, over the years, have recognized

13:59

That the U. S. political system is not democratic,

14:02

and who've written very persuasively

14:04

about that, which is commendable. Simultaneously,

14:08

though, they kind

14:10

of confusingly refer to the U. S. as a capitalist

14:12

democracy. DSA's

14:16

political platform is similarly confusing.

14:20

The platform says that the U. S. is no democracy

14:22

at all, and then at the same time,

14:24

it says we should strengthen and deepen

14:27

our democracy. So

14:29

one of the questions I want to ask us is why

14:31

is there this in, in, inconsistency,

14:34

um, and what would it mean to admit

14:36

that the U. S. isn't a democracy, to

14:39

engage with Marx and Engels democratic

14:42

republicanism, And then to

14:44

conclude, uh, that the first step

14:46

is to win actual democracy

14:49

in this country. So,

14:53

people don't forget when the government

14:56

gives a collective shrug in the face

14:58

of popular legislation, right? They don't

15:00

forget getting screwed over, and

15:03

I'll go through a little list. The Obama administration

15:06

overseeing bank bailouts during

15:08

the Great Recession. In 2013, there

15:12

was a universal background check bill that was

15:14

filibustered to death. By

15:16

45 senators who represented

15:18

only 38 percent of the population.

15:22

The next year, there was a bill to raise the minimum wage.

15:25

Supported by two thirds of Americans.

15:27

It died in the Senate 2016.

15:30

Trump of course lost the popular vote,

15:32

but won the election. And

15:36

then of course the Build Back Better Act was

15:39

processed through the legislative meat

15:41

grinder, as they call it. It emerges

15:43

in tatters. The Democrats

15:46

let the child tax credit die,

15:48

which sends 65 million children

15:50

right back into poverty. The Supreme

15:53

Court blocks student debt relief. Jeopardizes

15:56

abortion access, so on and so forth. And

15:58

then also, the wars, right? The endless

16:01

wars that you and I have

16:03

no control over, even if the president

16:05

sought congressional approval, which

16:08

he doesn't. In

16:11

the face of this mass political

16:14

apathy and growing discontent, the Democratic

16:16

Party fearmongers and

16:18

distorts and manipulates the meaning of democracy

16:20

for its own purposes. If

16:23

the Democrats really cared about democracy,

16:25

I want to argue, or if they really cared

16:27

about stopping Trump, they would demand

16:29

a democratic constitution. Trump

16:32

and the far right didn't get to where they are despite

16:35

a revered constitution, as some have

16:37

argued, but they actually got

16:39

there because of it, and with help from

16:41

the Democratic Party. And

16:44

so only the, uh, ultimately

16:46

I should say the only meaningful division between

16:49

political movements is the question of

16:51

democracy. Democracy is either

16:53

something that you want or

16:55

you don't want, and therefore

16:57

you either fight the Constitution or you

17:00

support the Constitution. What's

17:03

interesting is that our situation parallels

17:05

France's debate surrounding the Dreyfus

17:07

Affair and Alexander Millerand joining

17:10

the government in 1899 to

17:12

defend the Republic, to

17:15

save democracy, so on and so forth.

17:19

Equally interesting is that Karl Kautsky and Rosa

17:21

Luxemburg weren't fooled. They actually wrote

17:23

very persuasively. Um,

17:25

and this is Kautsky saying if you want to strengthen

17:27

the propagandist power of the Republican

17:29

idea in France, then you have to

17:31

show that the Republic we

17:33

want is the Republic of

17:35

1793, 1848,

17:38

and 1871. Right, that the

17:40

democracy we want is fundamentally

17:42

different from the Republic of today.

17:46

So to wrap up, I'm going to touch on

17:48

two organizations and their relationship

17:51

to the Constitution, the

17:53

Contemporary Poor People's Campaign, and

17:55

then also Students for a Democratic Society.

17:59

There's a tendency, I think, on the American

18:01

left to label SDS and the civil

18:03

rights movement not socialist, and

18:06

thereby dismiss really two decades

18:08

of our history, which is disappointing. So

18:11

in 1968, MLK writes

18:13

that the civil rights movement has left the

18:15

realm of constitutional rights

18:18

and has entered the area of human rights. Today's.

18:21

Four people campaign looks to continue

18:24

on that legacy and they make a lot of

18:26

demands which I don't have time to go into now,

18:29

but the important thing is that while they critique the

18:31

state. And, um, various

18:33

elements of the Constitution, they don't critique

18:35

the Constitution itself. So

18:37

I want us to think about that a little bit. And

18:41

then I'll end with, um, Students

18:43

for a Democratic Society and, and say

18:45

that their idea of participatory democracy,

18:48

um, is very interesting and very laudable.

18:50

And yet no one asked if participatory

18:53

democracy was possible in a country

18:56

with an undemocratic Constitution. And

18:58

I think that this was really a missed opportunity.

19:01

But it's also one that we can

19:04

learn from. So

19:06

ultimately wrap up just by saying, I think our

19:08

disagreement concerns

19:10

something sort of other than the undemocratic

19:13

structure of the U S constitution,

19:15

but really comes down to the content of

19:18

our political message, to the

19:20

ideas, uh, that we present

19:22

to the public and I'll try and touch on

19:24

those a little later. And I

19:26

just want to end by saying that all of the

19:29

struggles that DSA is engaged

19:31

in, all of this comes down to

19:33

who has political power.

19:35

And I really think that the struggle for democracy

19:37

is what will determine who

19:40

has that political power. Thanks

19:42

so much, and I'm looking forward to continuing the

19:44

discussion. Thanks,

19:47

Luke. Alright, next I'm going to have Jerry.

19:49

Um, and also just a reminder that our

19:51

Q& A is open, so if anyone wants

19:53

to toss any questions in

19:55

there, we're going to have a Q& A section. Um,

19:58

for now, Jerry, go ahead. Thanks.

20:01

So, uh, thanks, Luke. I

20:03

really felt that was, uh, really interesting,

20:05

and there's a lot I agree with, uh,

20:08

particularly that democracy is the most

20:10

important question facing the left. And

20:13

I really appreciate your historic,

20:15

um, review of Tom Paine and the

20:17

French Revolution and Lenin and

20:20

the democratic tradition within socialism,

20:22

I think is very important. Um,

20:27

but I think when we talk about

20:30

the United States is not a democracy,

20:33

that's, you talk about the

20:35

political content of our message being important.

20:39

I think that is the wrong approach,

20:41

because millions upon

20:44

millions of Americans believe we

20:46

do live in a democracy, and

20:48

it ends up being a very confused message.

20:51

Um, in fact, I would

20:53

say that what we're doing right now

20:55

is participating in democracy. We're

20:58

a socialist organization. We

21:01

have people from all over the country

21:03

listening to what we're speaking

21:05

about. We exist legally.

21:07

We organize openly. All

21:10

that is democracy. It's

21:12

bourgeois democracy, but it's democracy.

21:15

And to say that we don't live in a democracy

21:18

flies in the face of our existence

21:21

as DSA and every other socialist

21:23

or revolutionary organization

21:26

in the United States. So

21:28

I also want to approach this question from

21:30

sort of a historical point of view, and actually

21:33

a dialectical point of view, and I want to start with

21:36

the American Revolution. The

21:38

first great anti colonial

21:40

revolution, and,

21:42

uh, the American Revolution was

21:45

carried out by an alliance of

21:47

class forces, uh,

21:50

primarily in the leadership, of course,

21:52

was the commercial bourgeoisie

21:54

of the North and the plantation slavocracy

21:57

of the South, but the

21:59

mass base of the revolution

22:01

and the soldiers of the revolution

22:04

Uh, were farmers and,

22:06

uh, workers like the Longshoremen in Boston

22:08

and craftsmen.

22:12

And, uh, the,

22:14

uh, writing of the Constitution,

22:17

therefore, was really

22:19

a result of a balance of class

22:21

forces, which produced various

22:23

types of compromises. Uh,

22:26

the main compromises were

22:28

between, uh, the commercial bourgeoisie

22:31

of the North and the plantation bourgeoisie

22:33

of the South. And out

22:35

of that compromise, we get things like the electoral

22:38

college and the three fifths

22:40

of a human being, uh, law

22:42

dealing with slavery and other things.

22:45

But there are also concessions and

22:47

compromises with the, uh,

22:49

mass popular base of the revolution.

22:52

And those compromises, I think, are the Bill

22:54

of Rights. So we get,

22:57

uh, freedom of press, freedom of speech.

23:00

Freedom of assembly, uh,

23:02

freedom to, uh, redress our grievances

23:05

to the government, a jury by

23:07

our peers. Essentially,

23:09

what was created was civil society

23:12

and citizenship. For the first

23:15

time, you were born with

23:17

inalienable rights, uh,

23:20

from the government, not from God, not

23:22

from a king, but as

23:24

a citizen of a country. and

23:27

belonging to, as I said,

23:29

civil society. Uh,

23:31

Jefferson lays down the ideological

23:33

sort of basis when

23:35

he writes, you know, all men are created

23:38

equal. Of course, Jefferson

23:40

meant all white men who own

23:42

property are equal, and

23:44

that is written into the Constitution

23:47

as well. In fact, that's the primary

23:49

aspect of the Constitutions,

23:52

of course, is a capitalist constitution

23:55

written to enhance and

23:57

expand the power of the capitalist

24:00

class, but there's another aspect,

24:03

uh, the other part of the dialectic,

24:06

uh, within the constitution

24:09

that gives us democracy, uh,

24:12

and in fact, uh, the

24:14

working class have used that

24:16

dialectic. Aspect, uh,

24:19

to expand democracy in struggles

24:22

over the last 250 years, whether it's the

24:24

labor struggle. The women's struggle,

24:27

uh, the, uh, struggle for, uh,

24:30

the gay movement and the queer movement,

24:32

uh, civil rights, all

24:34

those mass movements have used

24:37

the aspects within the existing

24:39

constitution to fight

24:41

for greater democracy and

24:43

expand it. That's a contradiction.

24:46

That's a dialectic between these

24:48

two historical Aspects

24:50

of what came out of the American and

24:52

the French Revolution and the Haitian

24:54

Revolution, for that matter of fact, to, um,

24:58

now, uh, those

25:01

popular struggles to expand democracy

25:04

have always been met with resistance and

25:07

backlash and violence.

25:10

That's because the US is an imperialist.

25:13

racist, patriarchal, and violent

25:15

society. That's that

25:17

aspect of the dialectic. That's the

25:19

primary aspect of what American

25:22

capitalism is all about. But

25:25

there's also another aspect,

25:27

which is the democratic aspect,

25:30

which gives us a good amount

25:32

of political flexibility and political

25:35

rights, um, that

25:38

we are, have used,

25:40

uh, for the last 250 years.

25:43

Uh, so I think if you talk

25:46

to the American people that and tell

25:48

them this is not a democracy, uh,

25:51

it just puts up a barrier in

25:53

terms of understanding, uh,

25:56

what the society's content

25:59

really is and how to fight within it. Um,

26:04

how does this, uh, sort

26:08

of historic dialectic get resolved?

26:11

Well, I think there's two possible resolutions.

26:14

Uh, between these two aspects that

26:16

have been in contradiction for the last couple

26:18

hundred years. One is

26:20

a, uh, neo fascist,

26:23

uh, authoritarian,

26:26

uh, government, which, uh, we

26:28

can see is on the horizon, based

26:31

in, uh, Christian nationalism

26:33

and white supremacy and patriarchy,

26:36

uh, crushes civil society,

26:39

uh, and establishes authoritarian

26:42

rule. So that is a very

26:44

present and real danger. It's

26:46

always been an aspect

26:49

in one way or another of American society

26:51

from the very beginning. Uh,

26:54

and it's always been in contradiction

26:56

with expanding civil society,

26:59

expanding mass democracy. It's been

27:01

a constant struggle. The

27:03

other aspect of the revolution

27:06

is our resolution,

27:09

which would be, uh, eventually

27:11

rewriting the Constitution. That's actually

27:13

a question of the balance of forces, and I wouldn't

27:16

want to do that until we had a, uh, Solid

27:19

socialist majority in this country, but

27:22

we need to end capitalism with a

27:24

eco socialist, uh,

27:27

multiracial democracy. Those

27:29

are the two ways that that

27:31

historic dialectic is eventually

27:34

resolved between that, those

27:36

struggles. And that's

27:38

sort of the core of, in many ways,

27:40

where we are today, uh, struggling

27:43

between these two choices.

27:49

I think there's a real difference between

27:52

fascism and bourgeois democracy.

27:54

I know this is not what

27:57

Leep was saying, but I know a lot of

27:59

people on the left, and this is been

28:01

a problem ever since I've been, uh,

28:04

around the left as a teenager, uh,

28:06

of talking about the U. S. as

28:09

a fascist country or no

28:11

democracy as the DSA is that

28:13

no democracy. Um, maybe

28:16

I could just digress a little bit

28:18

and, uh, a short

28:20

story here. I had traveled

28:22

for about a year through South America in 73

28:25

and 74. I was heading to Chile. Uh,

28:28

when, uh, the coup

28:30

d'etat against Salvador

28:32

Allende and socialist government took place, I

28:34

was in southern Colombia at the time. So

28:37

I diverted to Argentina, and

28:40

in Argentina, there

28:42

was a mass revolutionary

28:44

movement that included all sorts

28:46

of left groups, uh, revolutionary Peronistas,

28:50

Maoists, Trotskyists, traditional CP. Left

28:53

social Democrats. Everybody was in

28:55

the streets. Everybody was demonstrating.

28:58

It was really an exciting time. Um,

29:02

and, and, uh, about

29:04

six months after I left Argentina,

29:07

uh, the people I stayed with, the people

29:09

I hung out with, uh,

29:11

everybody I knew. Uh,

29:14

we're, we're underground,

29:17

we're going into exile because of the

29:20

military fascist coup d'etat. Again,

29:23

everybody I knew was either killed,

29:25

tortured, jailed, in exile,

29:28

or underground. That's the difference

29:30

between fascism and bourgeois democracy.

29:33

So when we talk about

29:35

America is not a democracy, that totally

29:38

confuses this question, totally

29:40

confuses in our minds that

29:43

there's no difference between authoritarianism

29:46

and bourgeois democracy. So

29:48

I've wrestled with myself about

29:50

the coming election. And maybe

29:52

I'll just wrap up here and probably

29:56

help us debate the question. I've

29:58

debated myself, should I vote for Biden? Particularly,

30:02

obviously, with what's going on in Gaza. And

30:05

I decided, yes, I would. Not,

30:08

but I don't really view it as a vote for Biden.

30:12

Because it's not really a vote for an individual.

30:15

It's a vote for what

30:17

conditions are going to best

30:19

facilitate left organizing.

30:22

What conditions will best

30:24

facilitate our

30:27

ability to organize against capitalism and

30:29

in fact against Biden himself? What

30:33

conditions will best facilitate

30:35

a more open civil society

30:38

where we can use the democratic rights

30:40

that we have? Freedom of the press,

30:42

freedom of speech, freedom to organize, freedom to

30:44

demonstrate, and use those things

30:46

to build a more powerful socialist movement

30:49

in the United States. And when I look

30:51

at it that way, it's obvious that

30:53

the social political conditions under

30:55

Biden will be more beneficial

30:58

to the left than Trump's

31:01

neo fascism, which will quickly,

31:03

I think, lead to a McCarthy like

31:06

material, uh, uh,

31:08

conditions. Uh, and very

31:10

dangerous, uh, to our

31:13

existence and to the existence of

31:15

millions of people throughout our country. So

31:19

let me just wrap it up there. I'm sure, uh,

31:21

people will have a lot of questions and we can get into

31:23

a discussion. Thank you. Thank

31:29

you, Jerry. All right, and I'm going to have

31:31

Luke and Jerry also give 10 minute

31:33

or 5 minute direct responses. So starting

31:36

with you, Luke. Yeah,

31:40

thanks, Sarah. I know we've got some

31:42

provocative questions to go into

31:44

to, um, the

31:48

1st thing I want to touch on is this

31:50

idea of the US

31:53

being a democracy or not a democracy

31:56

and. What the DSA

31:59

has done and its platform

32:01

when it says the

32:03

United States, the country that says

32:05

it is the world's greatest democracy is

32:08

no democracy at all. Um,

32:11

I find that actually very clarifying

32:14

somewhere along the way, someone

32:17

in the DSA or a group of people in the DSA

32:19

went back to the

32:22

traditional understanding of what is a democracy.

32:25

Um, and that's a contested

32:28

term, right? You could probably pull many

32:30

different political scientists and say,

32:33

You know, what is a democracy, this, that, and the other.

32:35

So I think it's helpful to really focus

32:37

in on what folks

32:40

have described in our

32:42

tradition, even, and I listed some of them.

32:45

So a democracy being universal

32:47

and equal suffrage, uh, that

32:51

elects a group of people into

32:53

a unicameral legislature, straight

32:55

from the French revolution, straight from

32:58

Tom Paine, and it's in the demands

33:00

of classical Marxism

33:03

prior to. So

33:06

to really put that front and center and say,

33:09

this is what democracy is,

33:11

there might be all these other different

33:13

variations or political systems,

33:16

but this is what democracy

33:18

is. And it's this particular

33:20

type of state that we need. In

33:22

order to carry out a

33:25

struggle for something else, the

33:30

other thing that I want us to think about

33:33

is how are

33:35

we going to build

33:37

a particular movement

33:40

for anything, right? How

33:42

are we actually going to get folks

33:45

going and moving and and

33:47

in action? Um, you

33:50

know, Jerry mentioned particular conditions

33:53

that we might need, um, or

33:55

maybe what kind of slogans or particular

33:57

ideas we'd need to kind of

33:59

get folks active. And

34:02

that's where I think it's helpful

34:04

to put up the two other.

34:08

Positions out there besides democratic

34:10

republicanism being either electoralism

34:13

or socialism And

34:16

I hope to touch on this a little bit later But one

34:19

of those things can say well the

34:21

things that we want to get can

34:23

be ascertained through this existing

34:26

system And then I think,

34:28

at the end of the day, you'll have to reckon with

34:30

always coming up against some obstacle

34:34

within the Constitution and being

34:36

unable to explain what's

34:39

going on. The

34:41

other thing, or the other way

34:43

you might attempt to do things, is to build

34:46

socialist consciousness. So

34:48

say we need a socialist movement. And

34:51

therefore we build maybe the kind

34:53

of innate power within

34:55

the working class or we sloganize

34:58

for socialism. We use the electoral

35:00

arena to tell people about the

35:02

good news of socialism and

35:06

There, it becomes two different things. One, it

35:08

becomes, I suppose, kind of a judgment call

35:11

in some senses. Do you think that it's going to be under

35:13

the banner of socialism, communism,

35:16

workers power, that people are invigorated in

35:18

this country? Or do you think that a

35:21

larger movement can be

35:23

built under the banner of democracy? But

35:26

it also has to do with how you

35:28

think, um, political

35:30

consciousness. Is built and how

35:32

you really think you can engage people

35:35

and how you can really connect with people. So

35:40

those are kind of 2 things I

35:42

want to draw out both the definition

35:44

of democracy and

35:46

then also how you can build a movement

35:49

and how you can really connect with folks.

35:56

Awesome. Thanks, Luke. Alright,

35:58

Jerry, do you want to give me a direct response? Okay.

36:01

Um, Well, I think Luke's bringing

36:03

up some really good questions, how

36:06

to build a movement, how to connect with

36:08

people. I mean, these are really essential

36:11

things that every social should have

36:14

for great importance on, um,

36:18

in terms of the sort

36:21

of this definition that democracy is voting.

36:24

That's one aspect of democracy,

36:26

and I think it's an important one. Uh,

36:29

just look at how broad

36:32

and vicious the right wing is attacking

36:34

voting rights and have always tried

36:36

to limit voting rights as an indication

36:39

of the danger that may

36:41

pose to right wing rule. But

36:45

voting is certainly only one aspect,

36:47

and perhaps Not the most

36:49

important. As I said, look

36:51

at our Bill of Rights, freedom of speech,

36:54

freedom of press, freedom of protest,

36:57

freedom of grievances, jury

36:59

by our peers, uh,

37:02

and freedom of religion, et cetera.

37:04

I mean, when you, when we talk about

37:06

how we want to connect to people, uh,

37:10

those are the types of things that the

37:12

American people think of as living

37:14

in a democratic society. So

37:17

if you go to them and tell them this isn't a democracy,

37:19

it's just Confusing, but

37:22

the way to connect with people is

37:24

to defend those. Democratic

37:27

rights and to expand them. It's

37:29

one in the same struggle. Uh,

37:32

I agree with Luke that there's some

37:34

socialists who take a very sort

37:36

of dogmatic and purist approach

37:38

to this thing and only want to talk about socialism,

37:41

never want to concretely connect with

37:43

where people are at. Um,

37:46

and you can't build a movement that way,

37:49

but you can build a movement by getting

37:52

down with people in their daily

37:54

struggles. And where they see,

37:56

uh, what's important in their lives.

37:59

And what are the tools they

38:01

use to defend their interests,

38:04

such as organizing a union, organizing

38:07

a community group, organizing

38:09

through their church, going to

38:11

a demonstration, going to a picket line,

38:13

signing a petition, speaking out

38:15

at the school board, all

38:17

those basic Bill of Rights

38:20

freedoms or democratic

38:22

rights that we have. And

38:24

we should be there arm in arm

38:26

with those folks, but at the same time.

38:29

We can talk to them about the shortcomings

38:32

and the roadblocks, uh,

38:34

that we face because in those

38:36

various struggles and all those things I mentioned

38:40

is the dialectic, you come up to

38:42

the other dominant aspect

38:44

of capitalist society is repressive,

38:46

reactionary, racist,

38:49

patriarchal aspects. And

38:51

that's what gives us the ability to talk about

38:54

going beyond capitalism to

38:56

a multiracial democracy and a socialist

38:59

democracy. So, participating

39:02

in these very real struggles.

39:05

Around democratic struggles is

39:07

the road leading to building

39:10

a greater socialist democracy and

39:12

gives us the ability to talk about awesome.

39:18

Thank you, Jerry and Luke for

39:20

both of those speeches. So now

39:22

we're going to move into some Q and A's that I have.

39:24

Um, I'm going to give you both

39:27

2 minutes to respond. Um, the first

39:29

question is going to be most people in the United

39:31

States describe our country has a democracy.

39:34

and believe it is a good thing. Should socialists,

39:37

especially democratic socialists, seek

39:39

to claim the term? And if so,

39:41

what does this mean by the word democracy? And

39:43

I'm going to have Jerry go first on this one. You

39:49

know, I almost answered that question pretty well

39:51

on what I just said. So yeah,

39:53

I think we should claim democracy. I think

39:56

we should declare, uh, It claim

39:58

it as a as ours.

40:01

In fact, it has been ours. I

40:03

mean, Luke talked about the history

40:06

of socialist thinkers

40:08

and philosophers and organizers

40:10

and the role of democracy

40:13

and in the thinking of those

40:15

revolutionary minded folks. So

40:18

we should claim it, but we should also push

40:20

it and expand it. Uh,

40:23

and there's no contradiction between the two.

40:25

I think in our, uh, blurb

40:27

about the panel we talked about, should we

40:29

fight for democracy or defend democracy?

40:32

You do both at the same time. So

40:36

I'll throw it over to Luke now. Thank

40:39

you. Go ahead, Luke. I

40:43

think a few things. Um, one,

40:47

I can't imagine that any of

40:49

the folks, you know, who I mentioned would

40:52

look at the United States today and say,

40:55

this is a democracy. I just

40:57

don't think any of them would. Um,

40:59

Marx looked at the United States in 1848 and

41:02

said, it's a democracy and he was wrong. Angle

41:05

said contradictory things, you know, in

41:07

his communist program, the draft

41:10

of the manifesto. So, what you

41:12

can do is you can find the folks, Lenin

41:14

being one of them, Lenin's pretty good, um,

41:17

who has a definition of

41:19

democracy and sticks to it

41:22

until the end and critiques

41:25

folks who waver. On those definitions

41:27

of democracy by saying, well,

41:29

first, this is our first. This isn't so

41:32

that's also why I think it really helps to

41:35

have a concrete definition that you stick

41:37

to and you don't waiver from the

41:40

other thing. Um, that I would say

41:42

is there might be a difference in terms of what

41:46

we think most people in the United

41:48

States feel. And

41:51

then depending on what they feel,

41:53

what we feel like our job is to do, um,

41:56

say folks do think the U.

41:58

S. Is a democracy. It's the same when

42:00

folks talk about capitalism. What if the working

42:03

class thinks capitalism is good? Well,

42:06

then we tell them otherwise, right? It's the

42:08

same principle. You live in a democracy.

42:10

No, you don't. And if folks

42:13

are confused, we help them

42:15

understand and we clarify that. But the other

42:17

thing I want to push off on against is

42:19

to what extent folks actually think we do live

42:21

in a democracy. Because there

42:23

I think we disagree too. People

42:26

aren't exactly biting at the gun

42:28

for, uh, a democratic

42:30

constitution. But there's

42:32

vast, uh, disinterest

42:34

in politics in this country. Um,

42:37

people, people absolutely know that

42:39

something's up. People don't forget, you know,

42:41

being screwed over, as I said. So that's

42:43

where it's our job to come in and, and make that

42:46

connection. Um, I don't actually

42:48

think it would be confusing or

42:50

alienating at all, uh, to really

42:52

push that message of the U. S. is no democracy,

42:55

and we need to make it one. Awesome.

43:00

Thanks, Luke. All right, so the next question,

43:02

and I'm going to start with Luke first this time. Many

43:05

of the most important social movements during

43:07

the past century in the United States have been

43:09

focused on the right to vote, a core,

43:12

maybe the core component of democracy,

43:14

women's suffrage, civil rights, etc.

43:17

Is a right to vote slash access to voting

43:19

still an important focus of organizing and struggle

43:21

in the United States? Why or why not? So

43:27

I'd say the right to vote is not

43:30

the core definition of democracy. Um,

43:32

I'd say the right to universal and equal

43:35

suffrage is, uh, the

43:37

core of democracy. And

43:39

then having a state in which there aren't,

43:42

um, minoritarian checks.

43:44

As Robert Overt says that can somehow come

43:46

in and disrupt the power of the people,

43:49

um, voting is, of course,

43:51

what people often think of democracy

43:54

is being. And I think I might

43:56

have said, or I might have cut it that that's sort

43:58

of understandable, considering that most

44:00

political scientists also

44:03

define democracy as the ability to vote

44:05

in terms of Movements that have been

44:08

fighting for the ability

44:10

to vote. I think there,

44:12

it can be interesting to look at

44:15

the civil rights movement. Um,

44:17

and to look at the fact that here's

44:19

a struggle that goes a

44:21

particular distance, uh,

44:24

and wages a very important struggle and

44:26

then King towards the end of his life, basically

44:29

starts to think, huh, what if

44:31

we've come up to the limits of

44:33

the constitution? What if we've kind of moved

44:36

past that to a certain extent? And

44:38

so that's why I'm interested in engaging with the

44:40

Poor People's Campaign and asking them that

44:42

question. You know, you have these various

44:45

things that you want within the

44:47

lineage of those

44:49

movements. Do you actually

44:52

think that these things can be accomplished

44:54

within our existing Constitution? If

44:58

you do, what makes you

45:00

so sure? What about all these counterexamples?

45:03

If you don't, why not

45:05

say something about the Constitution? Alright,

45:10

thanks Luke. Um, next is Jerry.

45:13

Um, you

45:17

know, I'm Marx, um, saying

45:20

that the United States was a democracy.

45:22

I would say he was right. Um,

45:25

but, uh, you know, Marx was a

45:27

correspondent for the New York Tribune,

45:29

uh, during the Civil War, wrote about

45:31

120 columns. Uh,

45:33

and there was some short correspondence

45:36

between him and Lincoln. And,

45:38

uh, obviously Marx was a very strong

45:41

supporter of the northern cause

45:43

and for the, uh, overthrow

45:45

of the slavocracy in the south. Uh,

45:48

I think we're sort of facing a

45:50

situation like that today with the rise of

45:52

a neo confederacy. Uh,

45:54

in America, and the need to

45:56

unite behind, uh, defeating

45:58

the neoconfederacy and the

46:01

struggle for the multiracial democracy.

46:04

Um, when you say

46:07

we could use the U. S. as no

46:09

democracy, sort of as a slogan or

46:11

as a mass. Organizing tool.

46:14

Well, there is some people who do that today.

46:16

It's the right wing. It's the Magna

46:18

forces. They're the ones who are jumping

46:20

on the U. S. Is no democracy, uh,

46:23

and, uh, that the elections were stolen,

46:26

et cetera, et cetera. So

46:28

I would be careful about

46:31

sort of paralyzed, paralyzed

46:34

the mass slogans of the right, um,

46:38

which Dr King, uh,

46:41

when they started out the struggle

46:43

against Jim Crow. Uh,

46:46

you could erase then this is possible to

46:48

achieve with democracy. Uh,

46:51

and, uh, obviously the

46:53

victory over Jim Crome, like,

46:55

uh, was really a second reconstruction

46:58

period, was a great democratic

47:01

victory and it changed qualitatively

47:03

the life. Of millions

47:05

of people. Uh, there's

47:07

still miles and miles to go. It

47:09

didn't end racism in

47:12

any sense, but it certainly changed

47:15

the living conditions of millions of people,

47:17

uh, and the horrible conditions

47:20

that they lived under. Um, what

47:22

I said before about sort of rolling up our

47:24

sleeves and getting into these struggles side by

47:26

side with people around democratic struggles,

47:29

yeah, it does lead to the next step,

47:31

right? So, as Luke said, then it led

47:34

to the Poor People's March and

47:36

more of a class orientated

47:38

struggle, economic struggle, that King

47:40

was moving on to. That's

47:42

exactly where it

47:45

goes, and that's exactly where we want it to

47:47

go. We want these struggles,

47:49

uh, to expand and defend democracy,

47:52

to lead to the next barrier. Uh,

47:54

and it's through those processes

47:57

where we educate about socialism being

47:59

the, uh, necessary

48:02

step to complete and

48:04

consolidate these battles

48:06

for democracy. Thank

48:13

you, Jerry. All right, I have one more question,

48:15

and then Q& A is going to open up, so ask those

48:17

questions in the Q& A box. We can go ahead

48:20

and get them to Jerry and Luke. Um,

48:22

the next question is, is democracy on

48:24

the ballot in the upcoming presidential election,

48:27

as many are saying? And if so What

48:29

should DSA in the left also

48:31

do during the coming 10 months? I'll

48:34

start with you, Jerry. I

48:36

would say it is on the ballot. Um,

48:41

not in the way we would want it to be,

48:44

uh, but it's definitely staring

48:46

us in the face. Uh,

48:48

I don't think there's any way to ignore

48:51

the neo fascist movement with

48:54

its, uh, 73 million

48:57

voter base. I mean You

48:59

know, they have a much larger base than

49:01

we do. Uh, 73, 74

49:03

million people voted for Trump last time around.

49:06

And that is the base of white supremacy.

49:08

That is the base of Christian nationalism.

49:11

That is the base for patriarchy.

49:14

And all you have to do is look at Texas

49:16

and Florida and all the, uh,

49:19

states where the, uh, MAGA

49:21

forces control, uh,

49:24

the states to, to see what the agenda

49:26

is. And it's Serious

49:29

and it's frightening. So

49:31

I think, uh, the

49:33

main thing to do in this coming election

49:36

is to defend the squad and

49:38

the left, uh, the whole office

49:40

actually and progressives,

49:43

but also I think we

49:45

need to vote for Biden as uncomfortable

49:48

as that is, as I said

49:50

before, uh, what we're

49:53

voting for is maintaining the

49:55

conditions in civil society that

49:57

allow us to organize against

49:59

capitalism. That's the decision

50:01

we have to make. Uh, what

50:03

conditions are best for

50:06

organizing against racism, are best

50:08

for organizing against capitalism,

50:10

are best for organizing to

50:13

expand democracy

50:15

and to able, and to be

50:17

able to speak about socialism freely.

50:20

Uh, because we're heading for

50:22

something very similar to the McCarthy period,

50:25

which was really a nasty Period

50:27

and the left didn't recover that from that probably

50:30

really until the Bernie Sanders

50:33

campaign. In many ways. Thank

50:38

you, Jerry. Go ahead, Luke. Sure.

50:42

Um, democracy

50:44

is not on the ballot. Uh,

50:47

maybe someday democracy

50:49

will be on the ballot. Um,

50:51

folks in the U. S. have actually never

50:54

had the opportunity to To

50:56

decide if they want to live in a democracy,

50:58

they did a little interesting experiment,

51:01

um, in Chile, actually,

51:03

uh, in the 1980s, kind

51:05

of leading up to the ability to even

51:07

have a constitutional referendum

51:10

where the Communist Party went around

51:12

and they asked folks, what would you do if you actually

51:14

had the ability to make a constitution?

51:17

What would you do if you had the ability

51:19

to, uh, decide the constitution

51:22

that you lived under? So folks

51:24

in the United States have actually not had

51:26

that ability. Um, so

51:30

leading up to the elections, what do we need to do?

51:33

Um, we need to focus

51:35

on the democratic party. We

51:37

need to take the democratic party, which

51:39

is the political force that says,

51:41

we know what democracy is. Here's what it

51:43

is vote for us. We'll

51:45

protect your democracy. So on and so forth.

51:48

And we need to expose them. Uh,

51:51

we need to brand them as hypocrites,

51:54

we need to brand them as charlatans,

51:56

we need to point out all the instances

51:58

in which they are complicit, not

52:01

only in not stopping us from

52:03

Donald Trump, not only in not stopping

52:05

us from the far right, but actually

52:08

because they don't fight the Constitution,

52:10

in creating those very consti in

52:12

creating those very uh, conditions

52:15

that create the possibility, uh,

52:17

for someone like Donald Trump

52:19

and for a minoritarian movement.

52:22

Uh, to gain a foothold in this

52:24

country. So folks will vote for

52:26

whoever they want, right? Folks will vote

52:29

for whoever they want. I'm not here to tell people who they should

52:31

or shouldn't vote for. I'm here to talk

52:33

about what kind of political propaganda

52:35

and political agitation we in

52:38

the DSA can do. Our very small part

52:40

for very small part. Um,

52:43

I think it would be very important, uh,

52:45

and a very, uh, uh,

52:48

a long needed step. In this country

52:50

to have a force on the left

52:52

that actually said, you don't have democracy.

52:55

We can get democracy. Um,

52:57

and here's, you know, what it would actually mean to do

53:00

that. Thank

53:03

you, Luke. And thank you to everyone who's submitting

53:05

questions. I'm going to go ahead and open it with

53:07

the first question, which is by

53:09

Daniel W for either Jerry

53:12

or Luke. So I'll give it to both of you. Do you

53:14

think it's possible to achieve a socialist

53:17

democracy without universal and equal

53:19

suffrage? If so, how? Luke,

53:21

do you want to start us off? Um,

53:30

I don't know how it would be possible

53:33

to achieve a socialist democracy

53:35

without universal and equal suffrage.

53:37

When I say that, it doesn't necessarily

53:40

mean that I think we can

53:43

peacefully vote our way

53:45

into fundamentally

53:47

changing the economy of this country.

53:50

Um, but I don't understand

53:53

how we could democratically

53:55

change society. without

53:58

universal and equal suffrage.

54:00

Um, so the struggle to change society

54:03

goes hand in hand with the

54:06

struggle for democracy. You

54:08

can't, uh, impose

54:10

a change of society on two

54:14

people. Um, nor

54:16

though can you pretend as

54:19

if The existing political

54:21

system, the existing constitution allows

54:24

us to, in any operable

54:26

way, change society.

54:30

Um, I'm sort of reminded

54:33

of what Engel said,

54:35

I think, in his critique of the Erfurt

54:38

program, which I might have alluded to. Where

54:40

it basically says Look, it's

54:43

a problem that y'all aren't saying

54:45

the key thing here, which is

54:47

that this is not a democratic republic,

54:49

there's no way to work through this system.

54:52

And it's also a key thing that y'all

54:54

are forgetting that trying to

54:57

change society will create

54:59

massive amounts of rupture

55:01

and chaos and so on and so

55:03

forth. Um, but

55:05

no, you need, you need democracy. Thanks

55:10

Luke. Jerry, do you want to answer this question? Yeah,

55:13

I mean, I would say universal

55:15

mass voting rights

55:18

are part of what we want in socialism.

55:21

Uh, I think actually one

55:24

way we can approach this question is getting

55:26

rid of the electoral college. I

55:28

don't think we could move towards like

55:30

a constitutional convention at this time,

55:32

the balance of forces are totally against

55:35

us, but getting rid of

55:37

the electoral college would be a major

55:40

step. And it's

55:42

one that's already been

55:44

rather broadly discussed even in the

55:46

liberal mass media, and

55:49

has rather broad support even

55:51

within sectors of the ruling

55:53

class. So I think,

55:57

uh, that's a battle that can

55:59

be engaged and necessary, but obviously

56:02

voting is one tool

56:04

in the toolbox and all

56:06

the democratic rights that we have

56:09

protests, meetings,

56:12

press, speech, all

56:14

that has to be used. And,

56:16

uh, the question of violence is

56:18

really up to the ruling class.

56:21

Uh, and, uh, I believe

56:24

of course people have the right to self defense.

56:30

Thank you, Jerry. All right. Our next question

56:33

is from Clipsy. In

56:35

his book, An Economical Interpretation

56:37

of the Constitution of the United States,

56:39

Charles Beale reviews the evidence

56:41

and finds that less than 160,

56:44

000 white

56:46

men make up less than 1 percent of the population

56:49

participated in ratifying the Constitution.

56:52

No person alive today has had a hand

56:54

in shaping or altering it. Should

56:56

we defend this document as a democratic charter

56:58

for the government, or would it make sense to agitate

57:01

for a replacement shaped by mass participation,

57:03

as was recently done in Cuba? Jerry,

57:06

do you want to start this one? Yeah,

57:09

we need to change the Constitution.

57:12

Absolutely. There's aspects of the

57:14

Constitution I think we should keep. Bill

57:17

of Rights. We should keep that. Uh,

57:20

but, uh, the time

57:22

to fight over, uh, rewriting

57:25

of the Constitution or re foundation of

57:27

American democracy Is when

57:29

you have a socialist, uh, solid

57:32

socialist majority consolidated

57:35

leadership. Um, I think

57:37

we should look at Chile recently. Um,

57:40

for some lessons where you

57:42

had mass support for a new constitution,

57:45

the left went into it and came out with something

57:48

that got roundly defeated. I mean,

57:50

that was a huge defeat for the left

57:52

in Chile around rewriting the constitution.

57:55

So, uh, if, if we

57:58

try to use it in some mass slogan

58:00

or mass organizing tool today, rewriting

58:03

the constitution, no, I don't agree

58:05

with that because the balance of forces are

58:07

totally not in our favor. The right.

58:09

It's already organizing for rewriting

58:12

the Constitution, and if we go

58:14

into some process

58:17

with that, there's a good ability we'll lose.

58:19

Can we raise up the question

58:22

of expanding democracy and rewriting

58:24

the Constitution? Yeah, you

58:26

can do that in terms of education

58:28

and propaganda, but I don't see it as

58:31

a mass issue. Beyond this,

58:33

uh, idea of, uh, getting

58:35

rid of the electoral college

58:38

that has already been out

58:40

there as a mass issue. Thank

58:45

you, Jerry. Luke, you can go ahead. Sure.

58:48

Um, I think getting rid of the electoral

58:50

college would be great. And while

58:52

we're at it, we can add in all the other

58:54

very undemocratic things. I don't, I

58:56

don't think we need to start there. Um, as

59:00

I said, I really liked the idea and I'm

59:02

very curious. Um, and I think.

59:05

DSA should, uh, really explore

59:07

ways, um, of

59:09

agitating, uh, or developing forms

59:11

of propaganda around

59:13

this question of choice. And when have

59:15

you ever actually had, uh, the

59:17

opportunity to decide, uh,

59:20

the laws, uh, that fundamentally

59:23

shape your life, uh, in ways

59:25

that you can't always appreciate, uh,

59:27

but are the ultimate

59:29

system of making laws totally.

59:32

Um, So

59:35

if the right is

59:38

talking about it, and I don't think they're talking

59:40

about it in the way we are, they're talking

59:42

about it in a very truncated form.

59:46

All the more reason that we should talk about

59:48

it too. Uh, if the right

59:50

is talking about making a new constitution,

59:53

then we should talk about making a constitution. If

59:55

they weren't talking about making a constitution,

59:57

we should still talk about making a new constitution.

1:00:00

You know, the time is always

1:00:02

right. Uh, I think to talk

1:00:04

about a lack of democracy. Point

1:00:06

out why there is no democracy. And

1:00:09

then if the right has some idea

1:00:11

about what they think democracy is, we

1:00:14

poke holes in that too. Uh, just

1:00:16

the same way that we poke holes in the same

1:00:19

conception of whatever the democratic

1:00:21

party, uh, thinks is democracy.

1:00:23

And then on Chile, I'm not so

1:00:25

convinced that Chile really has

1:00:28

much to offer us. You know, the fact that they

1:00:30

reject one and then they reject the

1:00:32

second one. You

1:00:35

know, maybe folks 10 years down

1:00:37

the line will look at this and say, Oh, it bodes a

1:00:39

particular direction. But I think we

1:00:41

just focus here in the United

1:00:43

States and think about what

1:00:45

we need in this country. Thank

1:00:48

you, Luke. All right. Now the next question.

1:00:50

I'm gonna have two questions. One for

1:00:53

Luke, one for Jerry. So

1:00:55

first, I'm going to start with Luke. How

1:00:57

do you reconcile Mark's original push

1:00:59

for the battle for democracy with his later

1:01:01

skepticisms following

1:01:03

the crushing of the Paris Commune,

1:01:06

namely that co opting ready made state

1:01:08

machinery is ineffective? Yeah,

1:01:15

that's a great question. Um, because

1:01:17

if you look at the, or

1:01:19

what would you call it, historiography of Marx

1:01:21

or whatnot, um, the

1:01:24

traditional opinion is, well,

1:01:26

Marx has a certain conception

1:01:28

of the state, and then he looks at the Paris

1:01:30

Commune, and the Paris Commune kind of

1:01:33

changes everything. Um, I

1:01:35

don't think it does. You

1:01:38

know, uh, the quote that I took

1:01:40

from Angles there is from, uh, a

1:01:42

letter that he wrote to someone in 1892,

1:01:47

just a year before he dies or so. Marx

1:01:50

and I, for 40 years, have been

1:01:52

repeating ad nauseum what we need

1:01:54

as a democratic republic. Okay.

1:01:57

Um, the same point being that Marx,

1:01:59

uh, in the demands of the German

1:02:02

Communist Party, uh, that

1:02:04

he writes, oh, what's that, 1850

1:02:06

or so, a lot of that has the exact

1:02:08

same things that he praises in the

1:02:10

19th century. Paris commune. Um,

1:02:13

so this idea of kind of smashing

1:02:15

the state and establishing the,

1:02:17

um, dictatorship of

1:02:19

the proletariat, so to think, um,

1:02:22

I don't think that that in any way, uh,

1:02:24

disqualifies this idea

1:02:27

of a democratic state at its core, uh,

1:02:30

being one with the unicameral legislature

1:02:32

elected by universal and equal suffrage.

1:02:35

It's from that position that you can

1:02:37

do all those other things that he discusses.

1:02:39

Um, or I should say that he wants to

1:02:41

see. In the Paris commune, because,

1:02:44

of course, he's embellishing that whole thing, too,

1:02:46

in many ways, uh, in order

1:02:48

to really draw out what he'd like to see done.

1:02:53

All right. Thank you, Luke. So,

1:02:55

the next question is going to be for Jerry, um,

1:02:58

and it is, it says, Jerry, I agree

1:03:00

with the clear distinction with bourgeoisie democracy

1:03:03

in the United States and the neo fascism,

1:03:05

neo absurd in Chile. However,

1:03:07

it's, of course, worth noting that

1:03:09

U. S. involvement in the military coup that created

1:03:11

a fascist Chile. Does or should

1:03:14

the suppression by the United States of usually

1:03:16

anti capitalist democracies around the world

1:03:18

undermine the extent of democracy we enjoy

1:03:21

here at home? Go ahead, Jerry. Yeah,

1:03:25

the United States is an imperialist,

1:03:28

racist, patriarchal,

1:03:30

violent society. The

1:03:33

American bourgeoisie is

1:03:35

all those things. And we've always

1:03:37

known that. That's why we're socialists. That's why we want

1:03:39

to get rid of capitalism and

1:03:42

build a socialist society. Uh,

1:03:45

as I've been arguing here all

1:03:48

along, that's the main

1:03:50

aspect of, uh,

1:03:52

the historic dialectic that we're facing.

1:03:55

Uh, the U.

1:03:57

S. imperialism, and European

1:04:00

imperialism as well, has always

1:04:04

had a fascist

1:04:06

face, uh, in the global south.

1:04:09

Uh, and of course that, uh, Is

1:04:14

part of the character of what they are. Again,

1:04:17

uh, you know, the chickens came home

1:04:19

to roost with the Nazis and Mussolini

1:04:21

and the fascists in World War II,

1:04:24

and the chickens are coming home to roost

1:04:26

now, both in the United

1:04:28

States and Europe again, because the right

1:04:31

is on the march, the fascist right is

1:04:33

on the march, and of course, they

1:04:36

have plenty of experience, uh,

1:04:38

With their long history of colonialism

1:04:40

and imperialism throughout the world. Um,

1:04:44

no better seen in

1:04:46

the horrific, uh, violence

1:04:48

that the, uh, Israeli government

1:04:50

is carrying on in Gaza at this very moment,

1:04:53

and what Russian imperialists are doing

1:04:55

in Ukraine. So, um,

1:04:59

uh, I'm not arguing that America

1:05:01

is some wonderful

1:05:03

democratic society. What

1:05:06

I'm saying is that Democracy

1:05:08

is one aspect of the society

1:05:10

that we live in. We use those

1:05:12

rights every day to organize

1:05:15

a fuller democracy and

1:05:17

for a socialist future. Awesome.

1:05:23

Thank you, Jerry. And thank you to everyone who submitted

1:05:25

questions. We can't, we don't have time

1:05:27

to get to them all, but they were really good. So

1:05:30

I'm going to allow both of you guys to go into closing

1:05:32

statements. I'll start with Jerry

1:05:34

for five minutes. Go ahead, Jay. Uh,

1:05:38

oh, I've really enjoyed the discussion. Actually,

1:05:40

Luke and I have periodically talked about

1:05:42

this stuff for about two years now when he was

1:05:45

in Chicago. Now he's in Oakland. I've always

1:05:47

enjoyed it. Um, I

1:05:49

think it's a really important discussion

1:05:51

for us on the left to have. Uh,

1:05:54

and, uh, as Luke opened up

1:05:56

saying democracy is,

1:05:58

you know, the most important question confronting

1:06:00

us. I fully agree

1:06:02

with that. And I think,

1:06:05

uh, when you say there is no democracy,

1:06:08

uh, it leads, uh, logically

1:06:11

to the, uh, sort of, uh, positions

1:06:14

that Luke and I have on the election.

1:06:17

where our sort of real differences

1:06:19

come to the fore, where if

1:06:22

you have no democracy, then there's

1:06:24

really no difference between Trump and Biden

1:06:26

that we have to worry about, because

1:06:29

America isn't a democracy. But

1:06:32

if you think that there is a democracy

1:06:35

in the United States, that

1:06:37

there are clear differences

1:06:39

between these two camps, And

1:06:42

they, and having one or the other

1:06:44

in power will make a big

1:06:47

difference in terms of our ability

1:06:50

to organize. I'm not saying that

1:06:52

you vote for Biden because he's

1:06:54

a good guy or anything

1:06:56

like that. We see

1:06:58

what his nature is, what he's doing. Uh,

1:07:01

what we're voting for is

1:07:03

what are the political

1:07:05

conditions that allow

1:07:07

us to best organize.

1:07:10

And it's really that, that's the question.

1:07:13

And the political conditions

1:07:16

that allow us to best organize are

1:07:18

the most open conditions, the

1:07:21

ones that, uh, where we can

1:07:23

use the existing democratic rights

1:07:25

that we have. To their fullest

1:07:27

extent to push

1:07:29

forward the socialist movement and the anti

1:07:32

capitalist movement. And

1:07:34

to me, it's clearly, uh,

1:07:37

that we'll have greater flexibility

1:07:40

under a democratic administration than

1:07:42

a neo fascist administration. Thanks.

1:07:48

Thanks, Jerry. Go ahead, Luke. Luke,

1:07:55

you're, uh, you're, uh, on mute. Thanks,

1:08:00

Jerry. That would help. Just to echo

1:08:03

what Jerry said, too, in the opening. I've, I've

1:08:05

always enjoyed talking with Jerry and, um,

1:08:07

you know, learn a lot from, from our conversations. Um,

1:08:11

a few things, though. This

1:08:14

desire for a socialist

1:08:16

revolution, um, that

1:08:19

folks talk about. I

1:08:22

do still want to draw a distinction

1:08:26

between a socialist revolution

1:08:28

and a democratic revolution. Because

1:08:31

I think it does

1:08:34

impact how we kind

1:08:36

of conceptualize the

1:08:38

future in a certain sense, and the same

1:08:40

way that it Does impact

1:08:43

how we talk to people and

1:08:45

what we say to people like

1:08:48

kinds of conversations we have and so on um,

1:08:51

so I

1:08:54

would argue that we want

1:08:56

a democratic revolution

1:08:59

in order to Create

1:09:01

the position from which we can

1:09:03

Decide what kind of society

1:09:06

we want to live in to decide

1:09:08

what kind of economy we want to have

1:09:10

We don't have that ability right now. Now,

1:09:13

of course in

1:09:15

the lead up to all of that There

1:09:17

are, of course, going to be people who will

1:09:19

be arguing for what kind of

1:09:21

economy we should have, uh,

1:09:23

and what the future should be. And

1:09:26

I would support folks who, during

1:09:28

that movement, in that process, during

1:09:31

that constituent assembly, whatever, however

1:09:33

you want to conceive of it, are saying we need

1:09:36

to take X, Y, and Z steps in order to

1:09:38

socialize the economy. Okay.

1:09:41

But I think our primary task is to

1:09:43

build a democratic movement that's

1:09:46

actually saying, hold on, we

1:09:48

don't even have the ability to decide

1:09:50

any of that right

1:09:53

now. And so then

1:09:55

the question becomes, are we going to build that movement

1:09:58

by telling people, uh, what

1:10:01

the future society could look

1:10:03

like? Or what the economy

1:10:05

needs to be in that future society,

1:10:08

or do you build that movement

1:10:11

by looking at the existing

1:10:13

society and saying, you don't have any control,

1:10:16

you don't have the ability to decide, right,

1:10:19

wrong, good, bad, doesn't matter.

1:10:21

You can't make it happen. So there

1:10:23

are, of course, going to be people who are

1:10:25

going to be talking about socialism. forever.

1:10:28

That's fine. The left,

1:10:30

though, has not been talking about the

1:10:32

constitution and about democracy.

1:10:35

And that is the first obstacle to overcome.

1:10:38

So I really feel like that's, uh, that's

1:10:40

our goal. It's to have that ability

1:10:42

to choose, you know, to kind of use

1:10:45

some of the language of SDS, the ability

1:10:47

to, uh, decide the

1:10:49

conditions that Shape your

1:10:51

life or maybe to use kind of more

1:10:53

contemporary Republican language, the ability

1:10:55

to not be dominated. The

1:10:59

other thing I want to bring up just to

1:11:01

end here is an interesting book, um,

1:11:04

by these two guys who, um,

1:11:08

I always want to say their last names are Levitsky

1:11:10

and Ziblatt. I've said them so many times

1:11:12

now that I make up last names for them. In

1:11:15

2018, they wrote a book

1:11:17

called, um, How Democracies

1:11:19

Die. Uh, and this was

1:11:21

Obama's favorite book in 2018,

1:11:24

one of his favorite books. And Biden cited

1:11:26

it as one of the reasons that he ran for

1:11:29

the presidency. They basically said,

1:11:31

um, Trump became president

1:11:33

despite the guardrails of our

1:11:35

constitution. People need to

1:11:38

kind of learn how to play by the rules. We

1:11:40

need to kind of strengthen the respect that we

1:11:42

have for the constitution. That's

1:11:44

how we'll defeat Trump. And then

1:11:46

you flash forward five years and they come out with this

1:11:48

book called tyranny of the minority, where

1:11:50

they basically say, huh, it

1:11:52

kind of looks like Trump got into office,

1:11:55

not despite the constitution, but

1:11:57

because of the constitution that

1:11:59

allows a minoritarian movements to.

1:12:02

Take power, obstruct the system,

1:12:05

stop popular legislation, so

1:12:08

on and so forth. So, if

1:12:11

we are concerned about

1:12:13

starting, excuse me, about stopping

1:12:16

an authoritarian MAGA movement,

1:12:18

so on and so forth, as

1:12:21

the Democrats claim to be, Then

1:12:24

we should argue for a democratic constitution.

1:12:27

If the Democrats cared about stopping

1:12:29

Trump, they would argue for

1:12:32

a democratic constitution. They would read

1:12:34

a book by two Harvard,

1:12:36

uh, law professors. You know, I

1:12:39

only laugh because it seems. So,

1:12:41

uh, so kind of silly in that way, but

1:12:44

that's also what I want to

1:12:47

bring into this conversation is okay. How

1:12:49

do we, how do we stop bad

1:12:52

things? If that's really our goal, uh,

1:12:54

well, it's only through democracy,

1:12:56

right? Democracy would allow us to enact

1:12:59

the reforms we need. But then actually

1:13:02

allow us to go further

1:13:04

into socialism. And then, of course,

1:13:06

if you want to talk about democracy, you'd have

1:13:09

to talk about the U. S. Constitution. Thank

1:13:16

you, Luke, and thank you, Jerry. So that concludes

1:13:18

our event. Um, thank you

1:13:21

so much from everyone at the National Political Education

1:13:23

Committee. We are so glad that everyone turned out

1:13:25

to this event. Your questions are really

1:13:27

great. Thank you to both of the panelists.

1:13:29

Um, I have dropped the link to the public

1:13:31

Slack. In the chat.

1:13:34

So basically we have our slack

1:13:36

channel for impact is open so you can join

1:13:38

and we can keep this conversation and debate going

1:13:41

on slack. Stay tuned

1:13:43

because impact will also be having an event next

1:13:45

month. I'm working with the trans rights

1:13:47

bodily autonomy campaign commission as well.

1:13:49

So stay tuned for that. And with

1:13:51

that, this event is over. So

1:13:53

thank you everyone for coming out and solidarity.