SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
socialism
It Isn’t ‘The System’ That’s Holding Visionary Activists Back From the World We Want
A new book by Mark Satin—Up From Socialism: My 60-Year Search for a Healing New Radical Politics—makes a powerful case that the real answer lies within.
Nov 10, 2024
As administrator of the Schumacher Center for a New Economics, I have spent decades trying to usher visionary, regenerative, and decentralist ideas into the American body politic. So have many of my counterparts in organizations across the country. But sometimes I think we’re no closer to making a difference on a national scale now than we were in the 1970s. What is holding us back?
The usual answers are “capitalism” and the two-party system. But the more experience I’ve gained, the more I’ve come to believe that those are just excuses, and the real answer lies elsewhere.
Mark Satin’s new book—Up From Socialism: My 60-Year Search for a Healing New Radical Politics—makes a powerful case that the real answer lies within: We visionary activists have been so internally divided, and so driven by ego and unexamined personal pain, that we’ve never been able to harness the life-giving ideas of people like Jane Jacobs, Ivan Illich, Hazel Henderson, David Korten, Kate Raworth, and E.F. Schumacher himself (all of whom turn up in Satin’s book) to a viable national political organization.
The last page reveals the “moral” of the book: “Only by becoming kind people can we create a kind world.”
Satin’s book reads like a novel, and it is admirably, some may say shockingly, specific. It spends a lot of time on activists’ parental, collegial, and love relationships, not just on their political organizing. And Satin finds all of it wanting. (He is as tough on himself as he is on anyone, which gives the book a feeling of heartache rather than blame. And there is redemption at the end!)
To stick to the political organizing—the first part of the book tries to demonstrate that the New Left of the 60s was an inadequate vehicle for us. Satin shows in devastating detail that the leading members of his Mississippi Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee group were more interested in Black nationalism than in integrating the local schools. He shows that the older student leaders of his campus Students for a Democratic Society group were more interested in promoting socialism than in listening to the emerging ecological, decentralist, and humanistic-psychology ideas of younger students. And he shows that the leaders of the Toronto Anti-Draft Program (North America’s largest draft-resister assistance organization) were more interested in fomenting a Marxist revolution than in providing practical help to the resisters.
According to Satin, these and similar experiences led to the collapse of the New Left—and to the rise of thousands of independent feminist, ecological, spiritual, appropriate-technology, etc. organizations. In addition, two visionary organizations arose that aimed to synthesize such ideas and bring them into national politics.
The first of these, the New World Alliance, drew its Governing Council from a wide range of professionals, educators, businesspeople, and activists. It included three future Schumacher Society participants, Alanna Hartzok, John McClaughry, and Kirkpatrick Sale. But it fell apart after four years of constant bickering over policies, processes, and fundraising, often caused (Satin seeks to show) largely by personal jealousies and rivalries. At one point, spiritually oriented Planetary Citizens president Donald Keys accused McClaughry of being in league with the Devil! Some of the scenes in this chapter are so tragicomic that they’d work as skits on Saturday Night Live.
The chapter on the U.S. Green Party movement, though, is pure tragedy. By the mid-1980s, America was yearning for a major third party. Amazingly well-connected people were waiting in the wings to help the Greens get off the ground. But, instead, the principal organizers of the Greens—a spiritual feminist, an anarchist, a socialist, and two bioregionalists—created an organization in their own narrow image. As Satin sees it, this was a classic case of the organizers and their cohorts preferring to be big fish in a small pond. The resulting Green “movement” then engaged in phenomenally ugly infighting over the next decade—what happened to three Green women is truly sickening to read—and the Greens emerged in the end not as a major beyond-left-and-right political party capable of spearheading a regenerative economy and culture, but as a minor far-left protest party.
In more recent years, Satin found hope in what he calls the “radical centrist” or “trasnspartisan” movement—people and groups that are more interested in fostering cross-partisan political dialogue than in providing Correct Answers. He felt this would be an excellent way to insert the views of visionary thinkers into the national dialogue—and to win support for all kinds of local and regional experimentation. But he notes that the track record of radical-centrist groups like New America and No Labels has so far been disappointing. They’re as internally divided as the Greens and a lot snootier. What Satin really wants, he confides to us, is a new political movement of committed listeners, bold beyond-left-and-right synthesizers, and savvy organizers.
A powerful conclusion urges visionary activists to live more like ordinary Americans, in order to decrease arrogance and deepen understanding. The last page reveals the “moral” of the book: “Only by becoming kind people can we create a kind world.”
When E.F. Schumacher wrote his famous book Small Is Beautiful, he entitled his chapter about political economy “Buddhist Economics.” Later he must have had second thoughts about characterizing his ideas in such an oppositional way, for his later book, A Guide for the Perplexed, makes it clear that his ideas are consistent with the beliefs of all the great religions, including of course Christianity. When Satin argues that we visionary activists cannot move forward unless we (a). learn to be kind to self and others, and (b). listen to and learn from all engaged Americans, he is following in Schumacher’s footsteps. We should listen to him.
Mark Satin, Up From Socialism: My 60-Year Search for a Healing New Radical Politics (New York: Bombardier Books, distributed by Simon & Schuster, 2023), 380 pages, $21.95 pbk, $12.95 eBook.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Walz VP Pick Can Make Progressivism America's New Normal
The Harris-Walz ticket presents an opportunity to reposition the Democratic Party not just as defenders of democracy, but as true representatives of the people rather than elites.
Aug 06, 2024
In a bold political move, presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris has chosen Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz as her running mate for the 2024 election. This decision marks a significant shift in the Democratic party's strategy, potentially redefining the narrative around progressive policies and their place in mainstream American politics.
Walz, who has rapidly risen to national prominence in recent months, offers a fresh perspective on progressive ideals. His approach represents a type of "pragmatic progressivism” that seeks to position traditionally left-leaning policies as common-sense solutions that align with the values and needs of the majority of Americans. This strategy could prove crucial in bridging the political divides that have increasingly characterized U.S. politics in recent years.
The Minnesota governor first caught the nation's attention with his memorable labeling of former President and current Republican nominee Donald Trump and his VP choice JD Vance as "weird." This quip, while seemingly offhand, opened the door for Walz to articulate his vision of progressive policies as the new "normal" in American politics.
Walz's pragmatic progressivism offers a new direction for the Democratic Party. By positioning progressive policies as common-sense solutions rather than radical changes, he helps to reframe the party's image.
Since then, Walz has leveraged his newfound national exposure to argue passionately for a range of progressive initiatives. His focus on LGBTQ rights, increased welfare for childcare, education, housing, and renewable energy resonates with the Democratic base while also appealing to moderates and independents. Walz's framing of these policies as practical solutions to everyday problems rather than ideological positions has gained traction across the political spectrum.
Walz's background as a teacher and high school football coach informs his political approach in significant ways. He frequently draws on these experiences to connect with voters and explain complex policy issues in relatable terms. His emphasis on education extends beyond the classroom, as he seeks to better inform the public about the benefits of progressive policies to win their support.
This educational approach stands in contrast to the political evolution of his running mate, Kamala Harris. While Harris has moved from her roots as a tough-on-crime prosecutor in California to more left-wing positions during her 2020 presidential run, and now toward the center as the 2024 presumptive nominee, Walz has taken a different tack. He has used his time in Minnesota politics, particularly as governor, to consistently frame progressive positions as "normal," necessary, and aligned with most Americans' values.
Walz's pragmatic progressivism offers a new direction for the Democratic Party. By positioning progressive policies as common-sense solutions rather than radical changes, he helps to reframe the party's image. This approach could be key in countering Republican narratives that paint Democrats as out of touch with mainstream America. One of Walz's most striking characteristics is his vocal insistence that winning elections is not an end in itself, but a means to achieve real, positive change for people. This focus on tangible results over political maneuvering resonates with voters tired of perceived political games and empty promises.
The Harris-Walz ticket presents an opportunity to reposition the Democratic Party not just as defenders of democracy, but as true representatives of the people rather than elites. This shift could be crucial in appealing to voters who have felt increasingly alienated from the political process. Moreover, Walz's approach could open the door for even more ambitious progressive policies. By framing current progressive ideas as "normal," he creates space for discussions around more radical but similarly sensible policies. These could include initiatives like creating free community energy, refunding community services to make them safer, and commons-based housing solutions.
The potential of these policies to demonstrate the practicality and benefits of socialist principles in everyday life is significant. If successful, they could reshape the political landscape, positioning capitalist norms of massive inequalities, everyday exploitation, and systemic discrimination as the truly "weird" outliers. The Harris-Walz ticket represents a potentially game-changing moment in American politics. As the campaign unfolds, it will be crucial to watch how Walz's pragmatic progressivism interacts with Harris' more traditional political evolution. The synthesis of these two approaches could create a powerful new political narrative, one that could reshape the Democratic Party and American politics as a whole.
The implications of this new approach extend far beyond the 2024 election. If successful, it could fundamentally alter the way Americans think about progressive policies, potentially paving the way for more substantial systemic changes in the future. By framing traditionally left-leaning policies as common-sense solutions, this opens the door for local governments to experiment with more ambitious socialist initiatives without fear of immediate backlash. This could lead to a surge of innovative programs at the municipal and state levels, such as community-owned energy projects, worker-owned cooperatives, and universal basic income pilots, all positioned as practical responses to local needs rather than ideological statements.
The Harris-Walz ticket's success or failure will likely hinge on their ability to convince voters that their vision of "normal" aligns with the realities and aspirations of everyday Americans. If they can effectively make this case, they may not only win the election but also set the stage for a progressive new era of American politics.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Maduro Victory Shows Democratic Bolivarian Socialism Continues in Venezuela
The faith of the president's supporters in the Bolivarian project is a testament to the real achievements of the socialist government in weathering the 936 sanctions placed on the country by western governments and turning adversity into opportunity.
Jul 30, 2024
Shortly before midnight on 28 July, Venezuela’s National Electoral Council (CNE) announced that — with 80 percent of the over 20 million votes counted — the trend was irreversible: Nicolás Maduro had been re-elected president of Venezuela.
According to the CNE, Maduro received 51.2 percent of the vote, while his primary opponent, the little-known Edmundo Gonzales, received 44.02 percent. With that result, it was clear that the Venezuelan majority chose to continue the project of Bolivarian socialism introduced by Hugo Chavez at the end of the nineties. Recognizing the economic turn-around of the last two years and proud of their achievements in building 5.1 million housing units, securing food sovereignty, and deepening communal democracy, Venezuelans re-elected Maduro for a third six-year term.
A former ambassador to Argentina, the opposition candidate Gonzales replaced far-right leader Maria Corina Machado as the candidate of the Unity Platform after Machado was disqualified from running. Machado has long been an outspoken critic of Chavismo, supporting US sanctions and advocating foreign intervention in the country. In 2018, she asked Benjamin Netanyahu for military assistance in dismantling the Maduro government. Machado has close ties in the United States. In 2009, she was a Yale World Fellow. On June 23, 2024 she spoke at a National Endowment for Democracy awards ceremony in Washington, DC. She has been nicknamed the new “iron lady” after her idol Margaret Thatcher. In contrast, Maduro supports the Palestinian liberation struggle, linking it to the struggle of the indigenous peoples of Venezuela against colonial genocide.
The United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV) organized over 200,000 neighborhood units across the country as part of its electoral strategy. Most of the units were led by women, who woke up their communities early on election day to encourage them to get to the polls. A key message was “1 + 10” – each voter should bring along ten friends. Maduro was also the presidential candidate for twelve additional parties. One of his campaign symbols was the rooster, popular in a working-class culture of cock-fighting as a fierce and fearless fighter. Throughout the campaign, Maduro sought to build a popular humanist and Christian socialism with a legacy stretching from indigenous, slave, peasant, and anti-colonial struggles into Venezuela’s present struggles against oligarchy and imperialism.
Maduro’s victory was hailed by leaders across Latin America and the Caribbean, with calls and tweets of congratulation from Nicaragua, Cuba, Bolivia, and Honduras, and scores of others across Africa and Asia. Less than an hour before the official results were announced, far-right Argentinian President Javier Milei tweeted that the opposition had won an overwhelming victory, defeating the communist dictatorship in Venezuela. Argentina was one of a group of countries issuing a statement of concern about the election earlier in the evening – part of an expected attempt to discredit the results in advance. Other signatories included Uruguay, Paraguay, Peru, Panama, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Guatemala, and the Dominican Republic.
In a familiar pattern of undermining democracy in Venezuela and the wider region, the United States cast doubt on the results of the election. Secretary of State Antony Blinken said the “US has serious concerns” about the announced results — a predictable sentiment given the Biden administration’s long-running opposition to the Maduro government, and its recent reinstatement of sanctions against it.
From here in Caracas, I can attest that U.S. doubts are unwarranted. In previous elections in Venezuela, election observers have sided with the Venezuelan electoral authorities' ability to run clean elections over US-organized skepticism — and opposition candidates have frequently won in those elections. Venezuela has one of the most advanced voting systems in the world. It includes multiple steps to verify the identity of voters, the accuracy of tabulations, and the reliability of results. While some international observers, such as Brazil and Mexico, have requested a full account of the “actas” tabulated by the CNE, the Venezuelan system has generally inspired confidence for its accessibility and security in previous elections.
Indeed, US doubts about Venezuela’s elections appear less as concerns that the people’s voice will not be heard, than that it will. The Bolivarian revolution rejects US imperialism. It demonstrates that even cruel sanctions and armies of social media bots engaging in ceaseless psychological warfare cannot defeat a people determined to be free. In his speech to the Chavistas gathered at the presidential palace in Miraflores following the announcement of his victory, Maduro described a massive early morning hacking attack that was foiled in its attempt to disrupt the electoral transmission system.
The last decade of sanctions and hyper-inflation has been tremendously hard for Venezuela. GDP plummeted 80 percent in under a decade. Over 7 million people left the country. The burning alive of Orlando Jose Figuera by far-right oppositionists in 2017, attempted assassination of Maduro in 2018, US-supported coup from Juan Guaido in 2019, and keystone cop-style invasion featuring mercenary former US Green Berets in 2020 demonstrated the violence of the revolution’s opponents and their imperialist backers.
Nevertheless, the Venezuelan people remain undaunted in their commitment to peace, dignity, dialogue, and the rule of law, as Maduro emphasized in multiple speeches in the last week of the campaign. Their faith in the Bolivarian project is a testament to the real achievements of the socialist government in weathering the 936 sanctions placed on the country by western governments and turning adversity into opportunity. For example, in response to crippling US sanctions on the CLAP program responsible for distributing food to millions of Venezuelan households, the Maduro government financed national production, empowering over 45,000 local supply committees, the majority women-led.
The Chavistas’ victory adds to the momentum following left victories in Mexico and France. The triumph against imperialism inspires popular movements across the globe, contributing to the sense that we are in the period of a new internationalism. Neoliberalism is crumbling and a battle is underway for what will replace it: war and oppression or peace and solidarity? The refusal of the opposition to accept the results of the election, and, indeed, their willingness to double down by claiming to have won over 70 percent of the vote and incite violence across the country demonstrates that the battle won’t be an easy one. But the courage of the Venezuelans in continuing to build a democratic Bolivarian socialism proves that a future of thriving communities is possible – when people have the will to defend them.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular