II. Towards an Anti-Racist, Anti-Imperialist Program As we look at our options in 2000, we face a daunting international situation. The anti-imperialist U.S. Left has in the past been invigorated by revolutionary
international conditions; yet the current conditions—collapse of the first socialist experiments, the weakness of the Left in most countries, and the virtually unchallenged hegemony of the U.S. in the world
today—create a sense of restricted historical possibilities. Within the U.S., a predominantly white, affluent, conservative-to-reactionary electoral constituency wants to participate in the spoils of U.S.
ascendancy, reinforcing a situation in which the electoral "debate" between the two pro-imperialist Parties has never been more narrow or based on more common assumptions. Whatever plan the contenders carry
out, it will most likely be a variation with the same imperialist strategic objectives: stabilize the system so it lives as long as possible, keep the U.S. on top, and consolidate the two party consensus
for empire that prevents the development of an effective anti-imperialist Left resistance. Since the electoral ground rules construct a stacked deck, there is not presently the possibility
of an anti-racist, anti-imperialist electoral majority. That is why we have chosen to prioritize organizing mass struggles, where possible placing them in an international context, to directly challenge the
corporations and the government, and why we have been wary of proposals to enter into a struggle for power within an electoral system in which the most privileged classes and strata debate their division of
the spoils. However, is not inconsistent to understand the fundamental undemocratic nature of the electoral system and yet decide to participate in electoral campaigns, to exercise one's "right" to vote or
urge that others do so. Indeed, there have been important junctures in U.S. history when the stakes of elections are high, and the Left, whatever its strength, could see differences that
warranted intervention in the form of support of specific Parties and candidates. Such instances involving the presidency have included:
- The Radical Republicans and Reconstruction in the post civil war the period in which liberal capitalists, anti-feudal northerners, the freed slaves, and some poor white workers allied in a very
progressive coalition to keep federal troops in the South and enforce the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments.
- The Franklin Delano Roosevelt New Deal progressive alliance with the Left, communists and the trade unions inside the U.S., and the international united front against Fascism, in particular Nazi
Germany, fascist Japan and Italy, including a tactical alliance with the Soviet Union.
- The Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party challenge to the Democrats in 1964.
- The McGovern campaign in 1972 that was explicitly for civil rights and against the war in Vietnam and which also challenged some of the most reactionary forces inside the Democratic party.
- The Jesse Jackson/Rainbow Coalition insurgency within the Democratic party in 1984 and 1988.
- The Clinton campaign in 1992 in which a centrist Democrat tried to head off 12 straight years of far-right Republican control and the danger of a permanent Republican presidency.
But in the present situation, the two pro-imperialist parties are so very close in their overarching strategies, and as we will argue, the Nader/Green party is marred with terminal white
chauvinism. Thus, however we choose to exercise our vote based on an assessment of the stakes, we are not proposing that this is a time in history that warrants the Left actively support any party or
candidate. Our tactical approach, instead, focuses on using electoral politics to fight for expansion of rights while exposing the structural racism and moral bankruptcy of the electoral
system as well as deepening the understanding of all involved about the operations of imperialism. We believe this can be done by challenging those who seek election with specific demands that are
simultaneously achievable under the so-called "democratic rights" system of governance and at the same time are wrenching to the political economy of U.S. imperialism. As we said earlier, our main choices
have been to fight the MTA service cuts, to put resources into the bus drivers strike, to formulate demands that other forces in the U.S. could bring to bear against all major parties, and to explore tactics
in which social movements with specific demands could try to find points of leverage in the electoral campaign. Such campaigns include Free Mumia, end the racist death penalty, or the BRU's three major
demands, 1) Federal government—Enforce Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the Bus Riders Union's Civil Rights Consent Decree; 2) Place an Immediate Moratorium on All Federal Funds for rail projects in
Los Angeles, and 3) MTA—Allocate $1 billion to purchase and operate 1,000 new buses for the city's minority bus riders. To further this goal, the Strategy Center's Program Demand Group document, "Towards a
Program of Resistance" focuses on five categories of challenges to the practices of the institutions of U.S. imperialism:
1. Intervention Around the Globe—Government and Corporations 2. Responsibility for National Oppression and Racism Within the United States 3. Responsibility for
the Subjugation of Women Around the Globe and Inside the U.S. 4. Responsibility for the Degradation of the Environment and the Destruction of Public Health
5. Attack on Social Welfare Within the United States 6. Responsibility for Denial of Rights Internationally and Domestically
The document crafts strategic demands as well as specific campaign demands in each category to create a programmatic baseline from which organizers and activists can proceed to questions of
strategy and tactics. Several specific campaign demands are listed below to help frame our approach to the examination of the candidates to whom we will make challenges.
- U.S. government—cease exploitation of indigenous peoples and destruction of their lands.
- U.S. government, Group of 8 countries and their various U.S. dominated international apparatuses—cancel all Third World debt without conditions.
- U.S. government—open the borders, allow free passage of immigrants, abolish the Immigration and Naturalization Service.
- U.S. federal and state governments—free the U.S. Two Million by immediately releasing from prison all indigenous, black, and Latino colonial subjects; fund community controlled education,
detoxification, and job placement services.
- U.S. government and corporations—reverse all policies that foster, explicitly or tacitly, the super-exploitation of women, trafficking in women, particularly at U.S. military bases, and acts of
hatred and violence against women.
- U.S. government—reinstate Aid to Families With Dependent Children and guarantee jobs or income, free childcare, transportation, and health care.
- U.S. government—implement a zero tolerance for carcinogens policy, prohibit the manufacture, use, and distribution of a specific list of known carcinogenic and toxic chemicals by U.S. corporations
and the Pentagon.
- U.S. government—make environmental racism and degradation by U.S. corporations a criminal offense.
- U.S. Congress—increase and expand, rather than reduce or eliminate, gift and inheritance taxes, and earmark to fund social welfare programs.
- U.S. government—nationalize and fund all medical care, so that all residents, regardless of immigration status, including prisoners, receive equal and free medical care.
- U.S. government—support and facilitate the basic rights of self-determination for black, Latino, and Asian populations and indigenous peoples in the United States, specifically the right to devise
electoral proposals for political representation.
It is from the point of view of the struggle for these demands that we look at the electoral campaign and the candidates for U.S. president, leader of U.S. imperialism. |