The US is a one-party state and that party can be accurately called the Pro-War, Pro-Business Party (PWPBP) controlled by the oligarchy. It has two factions, called Democrats and Republicans. Ideological debate within this party is restricted to a narrow spectrum that only encompasses neoliberalism, neoconservatism, and right-wing extremism. This party has unanimous support from the establishment media and much of the intelligentsia, two groups that can be accurately labeled by the Chinese pejorative of ‘running dogs’, because of the tendency of dogs to do what their masters says in return for a few scraps. (It is an accurate label but one I hesitate to use because of my fondness for dogs who have many sterling qualities that these running dogs lack.)
The function of these running dogs is to police the thinking of the public so that they do not stray too far from PWPBP orthodoxy. They do this by disguising the fact that we live in this one-party state. So they put on a show of vigorous debate in the mainstream media, full of sound and fury but signifying nothing since the fundamental issue of power and who wields it and for what purposes is never addressed.
The one-party nature comes closest to being exposed when occasionally someone or some group manages to break through the cordon and gain visibility and traction among the public who sense that something is not right. We saw that with the candidacy of Bernie Sanders in 2016 and Sanders and Elizabeth Warren this year. Both are strongly challenging the Pro-Business agenda. Sanders is more strongly against the Pro-War agenda than Warren but she is better than most of the other Democratic candidates on this issue too. These two scare the hell out of the PWPBP because they are challenging the core ideology of the ruling class
The result is predictable. The media immediately finds ways to undermine these two candidates. One is to immediately label them as ‘unelectable’ because their polices are ‘too extreme’, despite the fact that their progressive policies poll extremely well. But facts don’t matter. The idea is to put fear in voters’ minds that these candidates are merely spoilers who have no chance of winning against Trump. We are also told repeatedly that the only voters worth targeting belong among those who voted for Trump. So voters are urged to back someone who is ‘centrist’, ‘moderate’ and ‘electable’, which is code for someone who is part of the PWPBP, who supposedly can win over these alleged ‘swing’ voters. In 2016, that person was Hillary Clinton. This time it is Joe Biden. Polls are conducted showing that Biden is the front-runner, hardly a surprise, given that he has been in politics for four decades and had high visibility and name recognition as vice president for eight years. Clinton also had huge leads in the polls at a corresponding time in the 2016 election before the Sanders surge began.
It is astonishing that an argument is being put forward that a spirited primary race to decide which person should be the Democratic nominee to challenge Donald Trump is seen as a bad thing when that is the very purpose of primaries. We are told that people should quickly coalesce behind the most electable candidate (i.e., Biden) and aim their fire at Trump. It takes a condescending attitude towards the public, that they do not have the sense to argue fiercely as to who should be their party nominee but then coalesce behind whoever does eventually win the nomination. The running dogs conveniently ignore the fact that the Republicans in 2016 waged an extremely bitter fight and that the insults hurled by candidates against each other and at Trump were extraordinarily vitriolic. And yet Republicans had little difficulty falling in line once he was the nominee and electing him president. Why does the PWPBP think that Democrats cannot do that? The answer is that of course they know that the Democrats can also do it but they are afraid that they will coalesce behind someone they cannot control. So dangerous candidates like Sanders and Warren must be cut off at the pass, early on the process, before they can win.
I am strongly opposed to Biden, seeing him as an utterly awful candidate, but would vote for him over Trump without any hesitation. The thought of abstaining or voting for Trump is unthinkable. I do not think I am unusual in thinking this way. I suspect that pretty much all the people who normally vote and support the various Democratic candidates think the same.
The real challenge is to attract those voters who realize, perhaps at a deep subconscious level, that the PWPBP does not work for them and have disengaged from the system entirely. And as we have seen in numerous local elections, when these people are targeted with messages that resonate with them by candidates who have a long track record of consistency on those issues, they come out and vote. But every effort will be made by the PWPBP to undermine that progressive agenda. Their allies in the mainstream media will try to find ways to discredit people like Sanders and Warren. Look for a never-ending series of articles explaining why they cannot win or on wedge issues and why they are not sufficiently advocating for this or that issue.
We see something similar in the UK when against all odds, Jeremy Corbyn, another democratic socialist like Sanders, found a chink in the armor of the UK’s version of the PWPBP and improbably became the Labour party leader. The thought of somepne who does not adhere to the PWPBP agenda scared the hell of the UK’s ruling class and ever since then, there has been a sniping campaign against him even by the so-called ‘liberal’ media to try and oust him as party leader, even going to the extent of smearing him as an anti-Semite or coddler of anti-Semites even though Corbyn, like Sanders, has an enviable record of standing for human rights and social justice his entire life and does not seem to have a racist or bigoted bone in his body.
So be prepared as we go through the next year or so to be deluged with articles hurling vague accusations against Sanders and Warren in the US and Corbyn in the UK to make voters think that there is something wrong with them though they cannot quite put the finger on what that might be. That is how the PWPBP and its running dogs operate. We have to be smarter than them.