I cannot focus at work. Like it’s the tiny maimed bodies the neighbor cat leaves in the yard, I can’t look away. I’ve been watching C-SPAN and reading articles with obsessive interest. For months, the reoccurring nightmares of a fascist US empire dictated by Trump have been getting worse. I’ve never paid so much attention to an election in my short Millennial life. If you have 5 minutes, here’s a summary of this blog post (if you have more, read on):
In my head I’ve been going over arguments for why the Bernie or Bust people are being ridiculous, as sayeth Sarah Silverman. But you’re not ridiculous. I think you’re right. Without Bernie, we’re busted. Clinton is a bust. But busting with Clinton is nothing the kind of bust we would face under Trump. Bernie has been saying as much. If you refuse to listen to his call to cast a tactical vote for Clinton, then you’re having the wrong conversation.
We do need to have the conversation about the Democratic Party’s foul play, about rank-choice voting, about the obscenity of a two-party vice grip on our electoral process, about campaign finance, about media, and of course, about the issues themselves. And you’ve been told to do what’s “strategic” to keep Trump out of the Whitehouse, to vote against your interests and it’s hella obnoxious and condescending. But I think there are two conversations.
There’s the conversation about what to do on election day (1 day of our lives) and there’s the conversation about everything else (what to do with the rest of our lives). I want to have that second conversation. That is the conversation about the movement. That is the conversation about what we want, what we value, what we need. But we are doing our values a disservice if we choose a 1-day strategy that sinks them. I’ve spent the past decade organizing for racial and economic justice movements, focused entirely on the second conversation. I’ve hardly paid attention to elections. But this year, I care about election day because we are in such deep shit. If we’re going to have breathing room to build stronger movements for justice over the next four years, the narrow question about what to do on election day matters greatly.
Bernie or Bust people: I don’t think you’re ridiculous but I think your position is a copout. Cornel West said on Democracy Now!, “…I can deal with catastrophe, not by panicking and being driven by fear, but I can look the catastrophe in the face and still tell the truth and still go down swinging with a smile and, most importantly, love…” It’s beautiful to center love. It’s beautiful to never bow to the indignity of casting a vote for the “neoliberal disaster” Hillary Clinton. Dr. West has Clinton’s record right. But who “goes down” and who does “catastrophe” hit if Trump is elected? Renowned academics? Who gets to decide who “goes down?” I think about my family members with disabilities who rely on public assistance. I think about the young white folks in the rural area I come from and confederate flags some fly off trucks. I worry about what the Trump campaign does to normalize and encourage white supremacy and I worry the Bernie or Busters haven’t taken that trend seriously enough to understand that it’s not just policy we’re fighting here, it’s narrative. Like Dr. West and Jill Stein, I don’t believe there is a whole lot of policy difference between Hillary and Trump—but there is stylistic, procedural and representational difference, and I think that matters.
I’ve heard a lot of Bernt delegates at the DNC say they are walking out now. That because the Democratic Party has screwed America and our semblance of democracy, it must now beat Trump alone. I agree that we should not become mouthpieces for the Clinton campaign and we should continue to hold the Dems’ feet to the fire. But there’s a big difference between calling out—and suing—the Democrats and promoting the tactic of mass voting abstention to teach the Democratic Party a lesson. Sure, a mass election boycott might make the Dem elites (Delites?) pull out a few stands of their hair in frustration (and possibly chunks in swing states), but the real people that “lesson” will impact, if Trump won, are the people who can least afford it: the people Trumpism targets. Teaching the Democratic Party a “lesson” by failing to throw down to defeat Trump by not voting won’t screw the Delites—they are enwrapped in enough privilege to ward off Trump’s costly policies. In fact, the Democratic Party would only capitalize on a Trump Whitehouse (campaign contributions from wealthy freaked liberals—and even some Republicans—would flood in were Trump in office!) Harming the lives of poor and working class people, immigrants, people with disabilities—is that who we want to teach a lesson to? But a vote for Clinton hurts people too, you say. Yes. And ultimately, I am saying Trump would hurt more.
As Osaremen Okolo said on NPR, “I think based on your background, based on the color of your skin, on your ethnicity, it’s much easier for you to say that you are never Hillary in an election between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. I think it takes a sort of privilege to be able to say that.” Scot Nakagawa of ChangeLab writes on Facebook,“Bernie or bust is for those who don’t know what it’s like to be truly busted. I know things are bad but they could be much worse – much, much worse. And, yes, I get that makes you angry. It makes me angry to be forced to vote against “worse” all the time, too. But then, I am reminded, this is not all about me. This is about “us.” And Mark Trahant, a journalist, professor, and member of the Shoshone-Bannock Tribe illustrates the point with this infographic:
Folks, we have a responsibility to do the ugly thing it will take to keep Trump from the Whitehouse. I’m talking about voting. Voting is not how we keep Clinton from doing despicable things in office. It’s not how we get us a better candidate in four years (or better, transform the whole political system). Organizing is how we do that. Do you think you’re spiting Clinton and her supporters by withholding a tactical vote against Trump (which is technically a vote for Clinton)? As my very smart friend Zeke told me, symbolically abstaining from voting as protest has never accomplished anything. It’s the weakest form of protest. Votes are aggregated. An abstained vote is not missed. No one ever says, “wow, Stina didn’t vote. We’d better cut out this antic of being a demonic party and give the power back to the people!” Voting isn’t how we can best express our visions for the world. There are lots of ways to protest: civil disobedience, creative direct actions, policy and direct accountability campaigns, birddogging, lawsuits… The protests at the DNC were powerful and sent a strong message. More of that. The only impact not voting (if you’re in a battleground state) will have is Trump in the Whitehouse.
If you think Trump in the Oval would provoke the mass revolution we’ve all been waiting for (sometimes called the “paradox of repression”), then you’re willing to bet on repression to the point of resistance. That begs the questions, who are you willing to expend, and who are you to decide? And Trump, to our disbelieving horror, becoming a viable candidate has activated people. If he wins, will people be more activated to organized, or mostly distracted by the day-to-day resistance of living under his repression or the ridiculous debates we are forced into? Under Trump, my theory is that our movements get less done. We move through quicksandy molasses, or worse, we fall from high cliffs. But Clinton will dampen our movements with her cunning liberal language! She’ll fill our ears with beautiful lies and take the fire from our bellies! That’s in some ways up to us. So many people are SO BERNT by the Democratic Party right now that the risk of appeasement or that the left left will swallow Clinton’s Kool-Aid doesn’t worry me all that much. Sure, there are diehard Clinton fans. But not among us Millenials, and we’re the future. I don’t think Clinton will dampen movements if we’re smart. I don’t think she’ll try to crush them the way Trump would.
Trump stole his mantra, “America First”, from a former grand wizard of the KKK, David Duke, who feels so inspired by Trump’s rise, he’s come out of a 17 year political hiatus to run for Senate in Louisiana. If you don’t see that Trump’s ascendency is bolstering white supremacy and providing a platform for mass recruitment to the Right and in some cases, explicitly white nationalist groups, then I’m sorry, you’re in a bubble.
Now, my very smart friend Hannah makes a good point here. What do white supremacy and its cousin, authoritarianism, require to find fertile ground? Precarity, insecurity, fear, threats, joblessness, poverty, classism–the stuff of neoliberalism and war. Of course, under Clinton, we get more of neoliberalism and war. It’s a Catch22. In these times, we must be ready for the rise of authoritarianism and in many cases, explicit white nationalism. It’s coming with either Presidency.
The difference between our rotten choices for President is that I believe WE are powerful enough to move Clinton away from some of her worst choices. On the other hand, for all I think our left movements are fierce, I do not want to see us shred them as we try to wrestle the debate back from Trumpism. It’s masochistic.
Unlike Trump, Clinton might not immediately dismantle key wins. And I’m not speaking of policy wins necessarily, but ideological wins. Like the idea that detention centers are abusive and unjust and we should shut them down. If we elect Trump, we sacrifice the ground that the migrant justice movement has won. Do you think a Trump Department of Homeland Security/ICE would hesitate to raid the homes of every single undocumented youth organizing a rally at their local detention center? Yes, Obama is the Deporter in Chief and organizers have already been targeted in some cases but Obama was moveable by us—he used his executive authority to expand DACA following mass pressure from movement networks like Not 1 More Deportation. Clinton will follow in his footsteps. What do you think Trump would do? I hope we never find out.
With Trump in the Whitehouse, we are pushed back into a debate movement groups are too tired to have. We’ve been having it for eight years as we’ve pushed the Democratic president and the national conversation along the arc of justice. Now, we’ve been pushed back on that arc into a different national debate, a debate that Trump’s campaign has forced. A debate as base as whether people of color even belong in the United States.
The Right’s fervor for deportation and detention will only gain ground if Trump is elected. (Of course, this is a great meme about how Hillary will deport using complicated laws–but these laws, I would argue, may be more amendable and breakable than the kind of neofascist strongman orders that will increase the reach of ICE and private detention centers and prisons). At least with Clinton in the Whitehouse, we might get to a point where we can debate how to free everyone from detention, not waste four years (and lives) debating the very morality of detention and deportation itself.
At the DNC convention, Bernie spoke of the importance of Supreme Court nominees. Clinton could maybe nominate a justice to aid in reversing the devastating Citizens United or Voting Rights Act decisions; who might help rather than hinder in the court saga of DAPA/DACA+ or the Clean Power Plan, or countless “religious freedom”/anti-LGBTQ cases. (I went on a Tinder date with a woman with a theory Bernie had traded a supreme court nominee for his acquiescence; the possibility is intriguing). Of course, we’ll have to fight to make that maybe a surely.
We’re in damage-control and triage mode, people. We’re at ideological war and this election is just one battle. Yes, the DNC has thwarted us—it is not new that the DNC is the party of the elites…are we even surprised they played dirty in the nominations?—but we need to recognize that, in the words of Lin Manuel Miranda, “we are outgunned, outmanned, outnumbered and outplanned,” for the time being and make a smart move like this was one battle, not the end. (If you appreciate the irony of quoting Miranda’s fictional George Washington, I appreciate you). If you live in a swing state[1], I beseech you to hold your nose and go vote for Clinton on election day, then get your eyes back on the bigger war we are in here. (Yes, I am using militant, violent metaphors. I find these metaphors apt because as this This American Life podcast demonstrates, wealthy Texas Trump funders think of this election as a mere battle and elected officials as soldiers in a much broader ideological war. Naomi Klein’s Shock Doctrine shows that the proliferation of neoliberalism requires war. So I’m inclined to use that metaphor because war is actually what’s at stake—and you know that or you wouldn’t detest Clinton so much. But do you really think Trump is the candidate of peace?)
A Trump Whitehouse would only normalize white supremacy and back us further into a corner where we’ll be fighting merely to get our voices into the debate, much less actually have a chance to defeat oppressive systems. THE MAN WANTS TO USE TORTURE ON FAMILIES. If we’re serious about ending deportations–and all forms of oppression–we cannot afford four years of the kind of defensive work a Trump presidency would require. THE MAN DOES NOT BELIEVE IN CLIMATE CHANGE. (Chart of denial).
My very smart friend Hannah makes a nuanced point here.
Just because Clinton is a neoliberal and washes her racism and war-mongering in Democrat Blue doesn’t mean folks in swing states can afford to leave the ballot blank. Again, voting is a thing we do on one day. Voting for Clinton will not kill the movement. Letting Trump become President just could.
What Trump will do to our justice movements is almost unimaginable. We do not have time to fight him. We’d better spend our time fighting Clinton once she’s in the Whitehouse. That is a more advanced fight. Trump in the Whitehouse is going back to the “great” American of 1882… remember the Chinese Exclusion Act? In 2017 that would look like the Muslim and Mexican Exclusion Act (not that Trump has any love for Chinese-American communities either).
Bernie or Busters, who are you willing to expend of to make a symbolic statement of uncompromising values? Using a compromised tactic does not compromise your politics. It does not make you less radical. It need not change your mind. It need not diffuse momentum. Honestly, I can’t wait for the election to be over because I am sick of talking about Clinton. She’s rotten, we all know it, can we stop telling each other that and move on to the work we actually want to do?
As many have said, we need to take the momentum from this election and expand it. For those politicized during Bernie’s “revolution,” we need to create and open millions of doors to social movements beyond electoral campaigns.
For me, I think that will look like organizing rural white communities for racial and economic justice in such a way that inoculates against white supremacy and authoritarianism[2]. I want to work hard the next four years to put a railroad switch on the tracks so this runaway train heading for Right supremacy changes course. So that in four years we do not have to drain ourselves on this tired old conversation about lesser evils again.
Scot Nakagawa summarizes all my ranty thoughts in one pithy Facebook dialogue: “If folks are talking about a broader strategy, one of going after the Dems to push them to the left, I’m all in. Voting for Trump in protest isn’t it. The right believes this is their time. They’re wrong. This is our time. We are the ones we’ve been waiting for, not Bernie and sure as hell not Hillary. But the clock may just stop at Trump.” “The visionary work of determining the future is ours, not the Congress or the White House. It is we, not them, who must play the role of the prophet, and then organize, organize, organize to discipline elected leaders to our prophetic vision.”
Voting is 1 day. Please don’t “make a statement” that could cause immense harm. Please don’t withhold a vote against Trump if you’re in a swing state. Vote for Clinton, then get back to building the infrastructure we need to organize millions of people out from under the Right and the neoliberal left in order to build the kind of movement it will take to make real change, the kind we can proudly call a revolution.
[1] It’s important to distinguish between the importance of voting in swing/battleground states and the negligibleness of abstaining in a solidly blue or red state. Eddie Glaude said on Democracy Now!, “…those of us who are not in the battleground states… those of us who are in blue states or red states… we should just leave the ballot blank.”
[2] “inoculating” is a term I picked up from Oregon’s fabulous Rural Organizing Project, http://www.rop.org
Find Heart and Face It 
AMEN, SISTER.
LikeLike