Have We Missed the Moment?

Matt Rothschild has it right: “The mood in Wisconsin is dejected.”

It was just a few months ago that the whole country had its eyes on the democracy uprising in Madison. We even witnessed gestures of solidarity from Cairo. What happened? Again, Rothschild knows what he’s talking about:

It seems to me that the state AFL never had a mass strategy, was surprised by the mass uprising, and was even a little afraid of it. The leadership never called for boycotts, never called for a general strike or any workplace actions whatsoever, never called for civil disobedience.

In an era of global austerity in which working people are being forced to pay for the bankster-induced crisis, unions in other countries are actually exercising the potent muscle of their massive memberships. Just this week, labor in the Greek public and private sectors have combined forces in calling for a general strike in opposition to the EU structural adjustment policy. In Britain, 750,000 teachers and other public workers are planning on not showing up to work in response to pension and other cuts from the Tory government. In Spain, thousands of ‘indignados’ have camped out in Madrid to protest unemployment and attacks on the welfare state.

In Wisconsin, the massive mobilization in February and March has either retreated into our homes or been transformed into – wait for it – recalls of six Republican state senators. In a global context, this is somewhat of an underwhelming response to union-busting and such hard blows against the public sector. Still, it wouldn’t be so disheartening if the opposition party actually presented us with a robust alternative.

But here’s the thing: It doesn’t. For all of Walker’s extremism, the rarely uttered fact remains: The Republican agenda is simply a more radical version of neoliberal policy that has been embraced by both major parties on both the state and national level over the last few decades. Let’s not forget that it was Tom Barrett who promised to put Wisconsin ‘on a diet’ and Jim Doyle who passed a budget – with Democratic majorities in both legislative chambers – which had a devastating impact on human services and public education. And for all of the loud noise surrounding Walker’s cuts to higher education and UW privatization scheme, it was the Doyle years that witnessed hundreds of millions of dollars in a loss of state aid and nearly a doubling of tuition.

In Democratic Massachussetts, public workers have lost the right to collectively bargain over healthcare. In New Jersey, Chris Christie managed to pass legislation eliminating COLA’s (Cost of Living Adjustments) for public employees with a Democratic-controlled legislature. On the national level, Obama’s main pro-worker achievement is passing Bob Dole’s old healthcare plan. EFCA never had a chance – even with supermajorities in both houses of Congress. I think AFL-CIO head Richard Trumpka was being generous to the Democrats when he said the following:

“For too long, we have been left after Election Day holding a canceled check waving it about — ‘Remember us? Remember us? Remember us?’ — asking someone to pay a little attention to us. Well, I don’t know about you, but I’ve had a snootful of that s–t.”

Regardless, the union leadership in Wisconsin has continued to rely on the Democratic party as its principle means for change, allowing the moment to pass without other significant action, as Rothschild wrote. Largely, the Democratic Party and its apologists got their way in circumventing the anti-Walker energy into the recall efforts. The little civil disobedience that did occur was savagely attacked by various liberal bloggers, with people like Jack Craver essentially writing David Blaska’s press release for him. The message was clear: “Don’t protest. It will alienate moderate voters. Put down the bullhorn, cut your hair and pick up a clipboard to help in the recall efforts.”

But what’s never discussed is the fact that, as far as progressivism is concerned, the Democratic Party is objectively a failed institution. It’s in the business of electing Democrats; its policy platform and values (or lack theroef) are purely incidental.

We’re constantly hearing how the Democrats need to be as aggressive in fighting for our side as the Republicans are for theirs. Obama needs more Bush in him, I’ve heard it said. But this sentiment is based on an essentially false premise; it assumes the Democratic Party is supposed to be the champion of working people and progressive causes. In politics, nothing talks like money, and since 1999 state Democrats have received 2 out of 3 campaign dollars from business interests; only 1 out of 8 has come from labor.

Ultimately, most people reading this are probably interested in defending the public sector, advancing the union movement and protecting the interests of the state’s most vulnerable citizens. This agenda is not the same as that of the Democratic Party’s and often it is even opposed. This is not to say that many individual Democratic politicians and activists are not stalwart progressives; my commentary here is merely a description of the party as an institution.

Creating sustainable social movements is a long and arduous process and guarantees no quick victories. But what is clear is 1) such a movement – including civil disobedience, strikes, mass protest – is our only hope for the realization of our ideals and 2) Taking back the Senate through the election of more Democrats will, in itself, do nothing to reverse the long-term, anti-worker and anti-public sector trends occurring in this state.