Rainbow Coalition: False hope for social struggles

Scan page 9

"In 1964, workers and the oppressed were told to vote for the 'peace candidate' Lyndon B.

Is the Democratic Party an institution thro ugh which working people, women, Blacks, Latinos, ar id gays can make gains and defend their interests?

For many in the radical movement today, the answer to this question seems to be "yes"-with a "maybe" couched in parentheses. For Socialist Action the answer is an unequivocal "no."

The great Black revolutionary, Malcolm X, once said in reference to the Democratic Party: "You can't get a chicken to lay duck eggs." But this biological miracle is precisely what many progressive activists and organizations say can be done.

Publications like The Guardian say that the political vehicle for this transformation is Jesse Jackson and the Malcolm X Rainbow Coalition. The rationalization for working within the Democratic Party is that the Rainbow can be used to promote unity on the left and, at the same time, build influence within the "progressive" wing of the Democratic Party.

Combined with this not-so-innovative approach to the Democratic Party is the perspective of eventually forming a third party-the class content and program of which is never mentioned. Will it be working class, middle class, capitalist?

Such a strategy is, at best, based on erroneous assumptions. In the first place, there is no "progressive" wing in the Democratic Party.

There is, however, a "deceptive" wing of this party that tries to sound progressive. This is the role played by the McGoverns, Cuomos, Kennedys-and, yes, "progressives" like Jesse Jackson and those in the Congressional Black Caucus.

The capitalist class can always manufacture politicians who will tell the masses what they want to hear. Their role is to sow the illusion that meaningful reforms can be accomplished by working within the framework of capitalist politics, especially during an election year.

Maintaining this illusion is essential to the ruling class in this country because it is its trump card for channeling social unrest-which there is no shortage of today-onto the safe road of working and voting for a "progressive" candidate in one of the two capitalist parties—invariably the Democratic Party.

Undoubtedly, the Jesse Jackson campaign and the Rainbow Coalition captured the hopes and aspirations of millions of the poor and disenfranchised during the 1984 elections. What made Jackson's campaign a new development in U.S. politics was the fact that he was a Black man seeking the Democratic Party nomination for president and that he expressed the concerns of millions of the oppressed-albeit with "liberal" phraseology.

But the objective of the Jackson campaign was not to mobilize millions of the oppressed in their own interests, but to funnel growing social discontent—exacerbated by increased poverty, a resurgence in racism and sexism, and the ominous threat of war—into the Democratic Party.

Jackson's base in the Democratic Party machine makes him a prisoner of the same capitalist class that is responsible for the exploitation and pauperization of millions of poor working people, women, Blacks, and other oppressed minorities.

Whatever Jackson's good intentions may be, as long as he maintains his loyalty to the Democratic Party and to the system of capitalist profit-making, all he can offer the oppressed masses, in the last analysis, are false hopes that will translate into disappointment and demoralization.

When the 1984 primaries were over, Jackson predictably delivered his Rainbow to Walter Mondale.

Many radical organizations and publications which were disoriented by the Jackson campaign-like The Guardian—followed suit and delivered their support to Walter Mondale. It was a short step from support for the "progressive" Jackson to the "lesser evil" Mondale.

Keeping electoral coalition afloat The "lesser evil" concept, of course, is not new. It is part and parcel of the political shell game that the capitalist class has played since the turn of the century. The object is to give the impression that one capitalist candidate is not as bad as the other.

The "lesser evil" concept tries to maintain the fiction that the individual politician is the decisive element in formulating policies as opposed to the class interests that the politician and his or her party represent.

But both the Democratic and Republican parties are the political representatives of the ruling class in this country. The differences between these parties aren't based on goals-about this they are in unanimous agreement-but on the tactical approach they should take toward implementing the policies of war and austerity against working people.

Hence, in 1940 working people voted for jobs and peace by reelecting Roosevelt-and instead got World War Il. In 1964 workers and the oppressed voted for the "peace" candidate, Johnson, and got the Vietnam War. In 1976 workers were told to vote for the "pro-labor" candidate, Carter, who attempted to break the national mineworkers' strike and start a war with Iran.

By the 1980 presidential elections, capitalist politics Johnson and got the Vietnam War."

had moved increasingly to the right with the end of the post-war economic boom and the defeats of U.S. imperialism in Vietnam, Nicaragua, and Iran. The Democratic Party could no longer demagogically offer "peace and butter." The capitalist class was forced to begin taking back the concessions it had granted U.S. workers in the 20 years following World War II.

In 1980, nearly half the eligible voters failed to see a "lesser evil" candidate. Feeling there wasn't a dime's worth of difference between Carter and Reagan, they just simply abstained from voting.

The presidential choice, in fact, was so dismal that many progressive organizations and individuals gave their support to middle-class-based formations like the Citizens Party and the New Alliance Party. These "progressives" were faced with the reality that there was no credible Democratic Party "reform" vehicle to climb onto.

Electoral politics vs. mass action After 1980, the ruling class understood the need to bring the abstainers back into the electoral process. They feared that behind this increased voter abstention lurked a steady accumulation of explosive discontent. This is what explains the overall friendly approach of the bigbusiness media and the Democratic Party to the Jackson candidacy in 1984.

At a time when working people and their allies are faced with a relentless bipartisan assault on their living standards and democratic rights, the strategy promoted by many so-called progressives of promoting the Rainbow Coalition as a means to "pressure" the Democratic Party plays right into the hands of our class enemies. put "pressure" on the U.S. government is also not a new one. During the course of the anti-Vietnam War movement, many attempts were made to counterpose campaigning for capitalist "peace candidates" (Eugene McCarthy in 1968, George McGovern in 1972) to mobilizing through mass demonstrations in the streets.

Which strategy was the most effective was demonstrated by events.

The "pressure" campaign exerted through mass action independent of the capitalist parties forced the Republican Nixon to pull out all U.S. troops in Vietnam, thus ensuring victory for the Vietnamese liberation forces.

The "pressure" campaign applied by hundreds of thousands of women in the streets to demand abortion rights forced the Nixon Supreme Court to grant this long overdue democratic right.

The "pressure" campaign put into effect by Blacks through sit-ins, marches, and open rebellions in the streets of U.S. cities was the force that ultimately eradicated "Jim Crow" laws in the South and established affirmative-action programs.

What a real Rainbow will look like The idea of building a "Rainbow Coalition," a united movement of working people, women, oppressed minorities, and all the exploited has great merit.

A political organization that represents the interests of all the oppressed is a necessary prerequisite for the emancipation of the working class and its allies.

But a "Rainbow Coalition" that is tied to the capitalists and their parties will never win freedom. It will only serve as an objective support for the capitalist system. Such a coalition will only deceive and demobilize the masses.

Many radicals today complain that independent mass action in the streets is insufficient and that it is now necessary to move on to "serious" politics—by which they mean participation in the Democratic Party.

Obviously, if working people are going to put an end to the policies of this imperialist government, they will need their own political instrument-their own independent political party-to do so. But this instrument cannot be the Democratic Party.

A genuine "Rainbow Coalition" will be a labor party based on the unions that will run working class candidates against the candidates of the capitalists.

Such a party will arise not out of electoral combinationism within the Democratic Party-or through some middle-class, third-party formation—but out of the struggles of U.S. working people themselves. A labor-party will be the projection into the electoral arena of the fights and mobilizations of working people in defense of their economic interests on the shop floor and around the big political questions of jobs, peace, and justice.

A mass-action strategy in the trade unions and in the antiwar movement is key to mobilizing working people in defense of their own interests. The changes in American society since Vietnam have made it possible for large numbers of working people and their unions to join in the fight against imperialist war and against the attacks on their standard of living and democratic rights.

The attempt of many progressive organizations to jump over this process and find a short cut to political "quick fixes" is a manifestation of a certain amount of pessimism and lack of confidence in the ability of American workers to learn, and learn fast.

The orientation to the Democratic Party through the Rainbow Coalition will only set back the process of independent working class political action. The graveyard of history is filled with well-meaning people who tried to find political "short-cuts" and ended up Democrats. It is necessary to warn against such a course.

SOCIALIST ACTION OCTOBER 1986