Friday, February 5, 2016

Clinton supporters, your candidate just bragged about the approval of Henry Kissinger, can we talk about this?

Last night towards the end of the Democratic debate, Clinton trotted out the approval of Henry Kissinger to bolster her foreign policy credentials. I almost fell off my chair. Kissinger was - and probably still is - a peddler of the most murderous, human-rights-violating foreign policy doctrine the world has ever seen. The fact that he is being accepted, by progressives no less, as some kind of influential elder statesman is outrageous. He should be tried for crimes against humanity, not bragged about as an endorsement. Furthermore, the embrace of Kissinger’s approach to foreign policy by Clinton speaks volumes about her progressive moral compass in general.


A little primer on what Kissinger actually did is in order, since apparently progressives have forgotten. Kissinger was the United States National Security Advisor and Secretary of State between the years of 1969 and 1977, under Nixon and Ford. You might recall this was a divisive time in American history with Republicans embarking on foreign policy adventures around the world to slaughter communists with brown skin, using poor and brown Americans as cannon fodder, and American youth basically freaking out over it. You can thank Henry Kissinger.  


Kissinger was essentially a right winger who narrowly defined American interests as capitalist corporate interests, and used the full force of the American military to pursue those interests, international law and human rights be damned. He supported violent dictators, overthrew democratically elected leaders too far left for his taste, probably had something to do with a few assassinations, and is definitely culpable for millions of innocent civilian deaths. Here is a list of nations where his policy decisions led directly to massive genocide: Vietnam, Cambodia, Bangladesh, East Timor and Chile. And that is not an exhaustive list. The catchy name for this in foreign policy circles is “Realpolitik” because “crimes against humanity” would be too honest.

My heart literally sank when I heard Clinton mention his name. I did not think this was an issue of debate within the Democratic Party. I thought Democrats supported human rights and the rule of law. What have we come to?


What say you, Clinton supporters? You admire her for her hard-nosed foreign policy decisions? She has to be a hawk because she’s a woman? Okay, you asked for it. This embrace of Realpolitik foreign policy is itself part of a larger Democratic Realpolitik approach to politics in general. The essence of Realpolitik is the abandonment of principles in pursuit of raw self-interest. Democrats in general, and Clinton in particular, have a habit of supporting progressive principles when it’s beneficial and abandoning them when it’s not. Democrats, including Clinton, have a habit of ceding moral and linguistic ground to Republicans and basically failing to fight fiercely for progressive principles and those they protect, out of fear of electoral defeat. Hence “socialism” - the basis of progressive morality - became a dirty word. Until Sanders brought it back.

Sanders’ appeal lies in his principled approach to politics. He fights for progressive values and those they protect no matter what. He’s said the same thing for 50 years, in times of electoral victory and defeat, when it made him deeply unpopular, and now, when it’s finally working out in his favor. And he's a true progressive on foreign policy, a supporter of human rights and international law, not a Kissinger fan. I support Sanders over Clinton because, among other things, she just legitimized the biggest war criminal and violator of progressive principles of the 20th century in the interest of her own electoral success. Oh, and she also supports the death penalty, putting her in good company with the Saudi royal family. Not cool.

Wednesday, February 3, 2016

I'm With Him


Some women who support Hillary Clinton feel deeply, personally, betrayed that a big chunk of progressives prefer Bernie Sanders. They think she is having a harder time than is fair because of her gender. This post is written in response to this article: 

An All Caps Explosion of Feelings Regarding the Liberal Backlash Against Hillary Clinton

I agree that gender plays a role in Hillary Clinton’s popularity and her unpopularity. I think probably many or most of her right wing detractors consider her gender a point against her. Probably some of the independents too. I’m not so sure about progressives. Probably some progressives harbor unconscious dislike of her based on her gender. But I think, for the vast majority of progressives, her gender counts in her favor, especially amongst female progressives.

I know it counts in her favor for me, but I still prefer Bernie Sanders. Gender is just one point amongst many. And Sanders’ many points in his favor include strong, consistent progressive principles. Standing up for his principles even when they made him deeply unpopular, a joke, an outcast. For decades he has been the lone socialist in Congress. Yes, Hillary Clinton has been attacked and ridiculed, but so has Bernie Sanders. And - what’s more - he’s been ignored.

What makes Sanders’ likeable is precisely the fact that he has never tried to be likeable. He’s spent his entire life being mocked and ignored while he stood up for his principles, stood up for us, even when we weren’t watching and didn’t care. And now, suddenly, people see him for what he is and yes, we LIKE him. We like him for his bravery, consistency, and strong progressive moral compass that has had him cast extremely unpopular and politically risky votes without concern for his own reputation and likeability.

The above article claims it would be impossible for a woman to act like Sanders’ and get anywhere, and excuse her wavering on progressive principles based on that. I don’t agree. I strongly disagree. And to explain and excuse a woman’s decisions based on her gender does a disservice to us all. We are big girls and we can take responsibility for our own decisions, and hold other women responsible for theirs. No free passes.

This discussion has also led me to examine why I am, admittedly, so much more emotionally drawn to Sanders, just as Clinton supporters are emotionally drawn to her. I think it has to do with which injustice we feel most hurt by. I am a woman, but I have always felt the weight of class much more keenly. I am a lower, or working class female, so perhaps that is why. I’d wager, in fact I know from the polls, that a lot of the women who so passionately support Hillary are not poor, and therefore of course gender is going to be the injustice they feel most keenly.

Yes, I’ve been disrespected, talked down to, probably paid less over my gender. But for me that is nothing compared to the feeling of poverty, which I’ve moved into and out of a few times in my life. I grew up in a working class household and I remember the panics over money, the discussions and fights about what we could afford. I am still enraged when I think about it. This during Bill Clinton’s presidency. I remember the social weight of class, the middle class friends and the shame of working class clothes, working class cars, working class homes. I remember how different I felt from other students at the private college I started out at, how far ahead of me they were with their private and elite public school educations, how much more at home I felt at a state college. I remember the lack of confidence in elite places, schools, employment situations. The set of unspoken things that made higher class people feel at ease. I know working class single mothers who cannot get a god damned break. I know how student debt has stunted and twisted my life path. Class is a reality, and it sucks. I remember losing a job at a bad time in rural Maine and the chronic feeling of panic that set in, just a constant underlying anxiety that made it hard to function. The idea that I might not make rent, might lose my apartment, the shame, have to move in with my parents...It’s a feeling of a wolf at the door, and I simply do not believe that Clinton gets that in the way the Sanders does. She does not know what it’s like to be poor, and her priorities and policy positions have shown that. I think a lot of her supporters, as shown in the polls, also do not know what it’s like to be poor, and therefore they are enraged that progressives would dare to turn their back on the injustice of gender by preferring a male candidate.

I do think some injustices are more urgent than others, and I believe that class is the most important injustice to address right now. It is the most physically and emotionally abusive, and it is the weapon with which other injustices are expressed. Women suffer economically, minorities suffer economically. In other ways too, but the economic suffering is the worse, and the most concrete thing that we can fix. I am not worried that women are making progress and getting closer and closer to true equality. I see it happening. I see female senators and governors and CEOs. I see the same for race. We’re making progress. I see the same for sexual orientation and gender identity. Sanders is also great on all of these injustices. Clinton's main claim to being better on gender is simply her gender. However, Sanders is far and away the best candidate on class injustice. The class problem is inextricably linked to the wealthy funding our political system, and Sanders is the only candidate NOT funded by the wealthy, and seeking to truly fix that problem.

I do not see the class problem getting better, I see it holding steady and getting worse. I want someone who cares about that, cares about that first, and will help us, instead of abandon us as Democrats have done for the past 30 years. They abandon us because they are funded by the people who want to hold us down, and Clinton looks like more of the same. We are never going to get a candidate who will go to war for the poor as long as they are funded by the rich. So, even though I am a woman, I prefer the male candidate for the Democratic nomination because he is running on a platform of really, truly speaking the truth about the suffering this shitty, “neoliberal,” capitalist economy that the Clintons helped build has unleashed on the poor and working classes of this country and the world. We are so tired of this, and tired of voting for Democratic candidates who betray progressive principles by never speaking of them for fear of their own electability, who betray us by voting against progressive principles to boost their own reputations with funders, and tired of the system, which perpetuates it. We want to flip this table over, and Bernie Sanders is our best chance to do that. I’m with him.

PS - I didn't write this in all caps because I think we should be able to express our passionate opinions without yelling. And I'm not "noping" out of the comments, because I think it's important that progressives talk about this.