Democratic activism and corporate Democrats

Ryan Grim hs a new book coming out, We’ve Got People: Resistance and Rebellion, From Jim Crow to Donald Trump. He provides a preview in this article, Life After Trump: How Donald Trump Saved the Democratic Party From Itself The Intercept 11/06/2018.

This magnum opus from @ryangrim (which I contributed a bit to) makes the point that an explosion of progressive, grassroots political organizing, largely led by women and in support of women, is the legacy of the Trump presidency. https://t.co/gg5kYI49Bx

— David Dayen (@ddayen) November 6, 2018

He provides a detailed report here about the upsurge in activism in the Democratic Party. And it's left activism. It's sobering to see it reported just how systematically the Democratic Party establishment tried to discourage grassroots activism and continue their losing, consultant-centric approach:

With a strategy in hand — recruit centrist candidates with an ability to raise money from big donors — national party leaders ignored or rejected advice from anyone whose approach to combating Trump involved embracing a strong progressive alternative, whether it came from Indivisible chapters, Lancaster Stands Up, the local Democratic Party, Swing Left, or DSA [Democratic Socialists of America].

Having to battle the official Democratic Party was disorienting, but the Indivisible Guide [for Democratic activists] had prepared millions, and the 50,000 (and growing) card-carrying members of DSA were ready from the jump. Through brute force, they broke through in primaries across the country, winning some outright and pulling candidates their way in others.

And the Dem establishment is still trying to frame the current upsurge as somehow due to corporate Democratic wonderfulness:

If you listen to the gaggle of campaign operatives, media planners, strategists, and policy mandarins that holds down the centrist wing of the party, they’ll explain how they dominated the 2018 cycle, channeling anti-Trump energy into moderate, business-friendly candidates who will return Washington to a bipartisan equilibrium. In September, Third Way, the most vocal defender of the political center, released a primary score card, showing that candidates backed by the DCCC and the NewDemPAC, the political arm of the House centrist New Democrat Coalition, won an extraordinary number of races, while left-wing groups like Brand New Congress, Justice Democrats, and Our Revolution had a much lower win rate. Jim Kessler, Third Way’s co-founder, has brandished these numbers like a weapon. He boasted “20 million Democrats can’t be wrong,” in a recent email sent to Democratic insiders and forwarded to The Intercept.

But delving into the numbers, as the Progressive Change Institute has done, shows that those successes are largely exaggerated. For example, Third Way statistics claim that 32 of the 37 NewDemPAC candidates put on the organization’s watch lists before the primaries won their races. But in eight of those races (AZ-09, KS-02, MN-02, NY-22, PA-06, UT-04, WA-05, and WI-06), the NewDem endorsee had no opponent in the primary. In another 17, the disparity in fundraising between the NewDem candidate and the alternative was so stark — $2.4 million to zero in one case — that they can be said to have been virtually uncontested. So in over three-quarters of the wins, the NewDem candidate had no real competition.

He goes on to explore that propaganda claim in more detail.

I wouldn't want to minimize the role of corruption (de jure and de facto) and old-fashioned greed in this phenomenon. But there is also pressure in all organizations toward institutional conservatism. That's not a bad thing in itself. If things are working well and your organization is successful and/or growing, that's strong incentive to keep doing what you've been doing.

It's a familiar phenomenon in business. If your product or delivery method is successful and making money, it's an obvious approach to keep doing more of what has worked: tweek and update the product, extend the successful delivery method, etc. And it works, until it doesn't. It's a continuing concern for successful companies to balance the need for innovation with caution about cannibalizing the company's exissting products and services.

Back in 1998, when America Online (AOL) was stil one of the hottest tech companies out there, Meg Ryan and Tom Hanks starred in a romantic comedy film called You've Got Mail. It was in part about the emerging practice of online dating. But the plot also involved the fact that Meg Ryan's character worked for an indepenedent bookstore that had to close because of decining business. The Tom Hanks character ran a big-box bookstore on the model of Barnes & Noble and Borders (remember that company?). Ryan's character eventually gets more comfortable with the big-box model, seeing that it can provide important services that the typical independent stores couldn't.

Ironically in retrospect, even though the film dealt with online dating, it didn't give any hint of the vulnerability of the big box model to online book sales. On the other hand, there are still independent books stores in the US. Two particular favorites of mine are the legendary City Light Books in San Francisco and Lumuria in Jackson, MS. Yes, Jackson. It's one of the best bookstores you'll ever see. Stores that deal in used books can get a big margin from that trade. They can also do special events targeted to their local markets, and they often provide a more useful and enjoyable kind of personal service.

Political parties have to adapt, too. In the last quarter century, the Republican Party has converted itself from a conservative party with generally really bad ideas, a party that included some more-or-less moderate figures, to the disciplined authoritarian theocratic rightwing party that is today in full support of Trump's fascist moment. The Democrats are still acting like they are a party with a heavy contingent of Southern conservatives that had to win some Southern states to be able to take the Presidency, a condition that hasn't been the case since 1988.

The popular American philosopher Eric Hoffer famously made the cynical observation, “Every great cause begins as a movement, becomes a business, and eventually degenerates into a racket.” (From The Temper of Our Time) It's an overgeneralization that seems to encourage an apolitical attitude. But it does refer to an organizational reality. Political movements need to construct a variety of institutions, including political parties. Not everyone who becomes part of those institutions is necessarily deeply ideologically commitment to the cause. And people do change over time. People making careers in parties and party institutions also develop a personal career interest in going along with the party. Even the most virtuous organization needs to renew itself over time. And, obviously, not all changes or renewals are good and effectie ones.

But starting on Wednesday of this week, there will be a running two-year political battle between the progressive and the corporate wings of the Democratic Party, no matter whether the Democrats take control of the House or not.

Another Intercept piece supplements Grim's with a focus on the Mississippi Senate races: Briahna Gray, Both of Mississippi's Senate SEats Are Up for Election. National Democrats Barely Paid Attention. 11/05/2018.

In my latest, I argue that the Democratic Party has ignored political opportunities in Mississippi -- the blackest state in the union-- where not one, but two Senate races are currently taking place. #ElectionDay https://t.co/TTkDjvoDBr

— Briahna Joy Gray (@briebriejoy) November 5, 2018

For the national Democratic establishment, Mississippi is s Republican state and, essentially, the corporate Dems are fine with it staying that way.