Giving Democrats progressive cover

AT THE University of Washington in Seattle, five days before the election, Democratic U.S. Rep. Jim McDermott spoke to the Political Science Honors Society on jobs, the economy and U.S. politics.

McDermott is one of the most liberal Democrats in the House of Representatives. His district is one of the safest for Democrats in the whole U.S. He has served 11 terms in a row and never faced a serious challenge. He even admitted that because of this situation, he is able to speak out more than most Democrats.

Befitting his liberal image, McDermott gave his opinions on many issues, most of which readers of SocialistWorker.org would share: withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan; creation of green jobs; ending the drug war; developing alternative energy; free public education through college for all; single-payer universal health care; and many more.

McDermott was often articulate on why he supports these issues. On the "war on terror," he noted: "The drone attacks won't work. We are only creating enemies who are angrier and angrier. No one can win an occupation of Afghanistan. The Russians tried it. The British tried it twice and failed. We have a view of ourselves that is far too arrogant."

On the drug war, he stated, "We have uneven treatment of people who use drugs. Marijuana does not create a danger to society. It just makes people hungry and mellow! The only danger is that it might make you stop studying and flunk out--but that should be up to you."

And on global warming, he said, "We have to solve global warming! By next century, it is predicted that everyone will develop skin cancer if we don't deal with it. "

However, when it came time to explain why the Democrats would lose seats in the election, he fell back on conventional reasons. "Obama's agenda was derailed by a horrendous economic collapse. President Obama's solution was for the government to provide jobs, but that solution is unacceptable to large sections of the public."

As to why so many people will support the Republicans and the Tea Party, he stated, "Anxiety about personal debt and jobs scares people and the Tea Party uses that. As long as you can scare people, you can get them to do anything."

So when it came to causes, McDermott blamed the manipulative Republicans and the naïve or conservative American people--not the failure of the Democrats to enact reforms that actually help people and would therefore motivate their support in the election.

THROUGHOUT HIS talk, McDermott's high ideals continued to clash with his "pragmatic" support of Obama and the Democratic Party in general. He stressed, echoing Obama, that the Republicans would "take us backward." They would dismantle health care reform. They would go back to the uncaring policies of Bush. ("Look at Katrina, we looked like a Third World country.")

He never seriously analyzed the actual content of the Democrats supposed "forward motion" that the Republicans would reverse. He never addressed the increase in government repression, like the recent FBI raids against peace activists.

He apologized for Obama's increase of troops in Afghanistan by saying he was elected so he should be able to make policy. On health care reform, he said we should work with it to make it better, instead of acknowledging that it was another boondoggle for insurance companies and an actual attack on the living standards of ordinary people.

He said the bailout of the banks was needed, but didn't discuss the failure to help home owners or provide large numbers of jobs rebuilding the infrastructure or developing alternative energy and transportation--issues that he supposedly supports.

Overall, instead of understanding that Obama's actual program has been a continuation of the war against workers and the poor, he asserted that Democrats were for "progress" while the Republicans were for going backwards.

Rep. McDermott is an extreme example of the dynamics of the Democrats. They win support from people who actually care about progressive issues by asserting lofty rhetoric and high ideals--whether on fighting racism and sexism, ending global warming, ending wars, defending immigrant rights or supporting LGBT equality. When the actual accomplishments conflict with the ideals, they blame factors beyond their control--nasty Republicans, an economic crisis, the conservative public, etc.

The reality is that they pursue a pro-business, anti-working class agenda and cover it up with nice phrases and promises. The Democrats play the "soft cop" to the Republicans "hard cop" but, as with real cops, their goals are the same--defending the capitalist system by increasing corporate profit at the expense of workers and the poor.

In terms of formal positions, Rep. McDermott is, along with Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D, Ohio), the "best" there is in Congress. They are feted at antiwar rallies, loved by people in many liberal organizations and touted as the best reasons to vote for the Democrats.

This makes them the most effective promoters of the Democrats' pro-corporate agenda.

They are fine examples of why voting for even the most "progressive" Democrats just ends up supporting the Democrats' real corporate agenda. Just as in every other area of life, actions speak louder than words!
Steve Leigh, Seattle