Cornel West for President 2012 SPUSA/Greens/P&F

[charley63]

I know this sounds like a reformist wet dream, maybe it is. But I'm a revolutionary reformist believe me.

The biggest disappointment of my political experience was the collapse of Ralph Nader's Green Party campaigns. I understand all the reasons for that, and his current "centrist" alliance with Libertarians is sheer bullshit.

However, if Cornel West, who has recently attacked Obama viciously and publicly, could get beyond his DSA connections and run for President in 2012 on a national ticket (Greens/SPUSA/Peace&Freedom,etc), we'd build a new left reformist grouping that would rival Nader 2000.

I'd like a woman to run as his running mate, and Cindy Sheehan came to mind. However, her response (sorry can't post links yet) to OBL's death is sheer idiocy. It's almost as bad as McKinney's pandering to Qaddafi.

OK, I've started about 6 arguments there, so have at it.

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

Revolutionary reformism? :rolleyes:

What is that, a synonym for political cul-de-sac? Fuck the Green Party and any DSA scum.

[Pretty Flaco]

Revolutionary reformism? :rolleyes:

What is that, a synonym for political cul-de-sac? Fuck the Green Party and any DSA scum.

any sort of shift to the left in american politics is better than the shit we've got right now.

[charley63]

Swaggasaurus Rex shares my sentiments exactly. I think we need a popular socialist running in 2012, even if he's reformist like West, because the alternative is to let the anti-socialist rhetoric aimed at Obama win the argument for the next political cycle.

[The Teacher]

He'd get my vote!

[Chimurenga.]

Garbage.

[charley63]

I believe in winning a American majority to an anti-capitalist politics, and we can't do that if we can't capture popular media. Nobody on the left is a good at that as Cornel West, love him or hate him.

[Terminator X]

Has Cornel West ever even indicated the slightest interest in running for president?

[Pretty Flaco]

Has Cornel West ever even indicated the slightest interest in running for president?

That's what I was about to ask...

[charley63]

The Greens tried to draft him 2004, but he was already committed to Al Sharpton.

[Zeus the Moose]

I believe in winning a American majority to an anti-capitalist politics, and we can't do that if we can't capture popular media. Nobody on the left is a good at that as Cornel West, love him or hate him.

And we'll be able to win people over to anti-capitalist politics by cloaking them in mild reformism? I really don't get it when people put up ideas like this...

EDIT: speaking for myself in the SP-USA, the way Cornel West would have to get the SP nomination would be to announce his candidacy sometime this summer, then win a majority of delegates at the National Convention, which he'd be running against other candidates; one who has declared (Stewart Alexander), and one who may be in the race soon (Jerry Levy.) It's not insurmountable, but it would require a concerted effort on West's part.

[charley63]

I am not saying Cornel West should work within the SPUSA, that's become clearer to me since I first posted. He should run as an independent, the way Nader did in 2008. If the SPUSA or Greens have a presidential ballot line somewhere, he should seek to get on that ballot line. However, his candidacy should not be contingent on winning over the parties to him, but to winning a popular following.

Nader's Green campaigns imploded due to internal politics in the GP and West (or any left candidate) shouldn't be drawn into that. We aren't going to win the presidency anyway, so why bother trying to work from within the third parties? Third parties do have important work hammering out participatory consensus at the grass roots level, and running state and local campaigns. The presidential race is a beauty contest, that's all. If West runs, he has a built-in popular base, use that to win over the third parties to his campaign.

As for why running a reformist campaign will win over people to anti-capitalism, well, that it is the logical conclusion of truly progressive reformism. Many in the popular movement will draw that conclusion for the first time. Many have already drawn it, but not enough. This is about publicity for left ideas, including reformist ones.

I believe, as Marx did, that a revolution will emerge from within reformism, not outside it in ultraleft fashion.

[Zeus the Moose]

I am not saying Cornel West should work within the SPUSA, that's become clearer to me since I first posted. He should run as an independent, the way Nader did in 2008. If the SPUSA or Greens have a presidential ballot line somewhere, he should seek to get on that ballot line. However, his candidacy should not be contingent on winning over the parties to him, but to winning a popular following.

Again, at least as far as the SP-USA goes, the time-frame for that is rather short, considering our national convention is in October so we'll be deciding then whether to run a presidential candidate, and who it will be if we do. That was the main point I was trying to make.


Nader's Green campaigns imploded due to internal politics in the GP and West (or any left candidate) shouldn't be drawn into that. We aren't going to win the presidency anyway, so why bother trying to work from within the third parties? Third parties do have important work hammering out participatory consensus at the grass roots level, and running state and local campaigns. The presidential race is a beauty contest, that's all. If West runs, he has a built-in popular base, use that to win over the third parties to his campaign.

On what basis would these parties work together, though? Would West be running on a socialist platform, explicitly drawing the connection from a platform of action in an election campaign to articulating meaningfully socialist politics (ie, working class power)? I get a lot of the praise that West receives, but would that translate into support for a socialist programme?


As for why running a reformist campaign will win over people to anti-capitalism, well, that it is the logical conclusion of truly progressive reformism. Many in the popular movement will draw that conclusion for the first time. Many have already drawn it, but not enough. This is about publicity for left ideas, including reformist ones.

I believe, as Marx did, that a revolution will emerge from within reformism, not outside it in ultraleft fashion.

True progressive reformism? Are you just talking about immediate/transition reforms that might be fought for if there were socialists in office, or are you talking about the idea that we can successfully use the state to our own ends without completely overhauling it? I'm trying to understand where you're coming from here, and I want to make sure we're not confusing reforms for reformism.

[Revy]

The Green Party is dying...

perhaps rightfully so, they have no energy or vitality as a party, so it's not like they are changing anything, regardless of their ideology, I wouldn't be surprised if the Green Party is eventually replaced with another left-wing progressive party. When you elect a Green to the state legislature of Arkansas (I think), as they did, and he switches to Democrat while in office, then you have a problem.

I think it's stupid to run as an independent for President like Nader does. It means you see it all about yourself. At least when you have a party, your campaign can benefit that party. The goal of Ralph Nader's "movement" is getting him elected to President. When you align yourself with a person, you align yourself with the potential political shifts of that person.

After the Brian Moore debacle, would the SP-USA even think of nominating outsiders? Rather than people who have been involved in socialism and the SP-USA for at least some time. Cornel West criticizes Obama today, but in 2008 he was supporting his campaign for President. He belongs to DSA which is all about the Democratic Party. How is this campaign not going to be like the one in 2004 where the Greens basically said "Vote for Kerry". Because some people criticize a Dem President but in the hopes he will change a little and they can keep supporting him.

[x359594]

The value of a presidential campaign by an articulate progressive public figure like Cornell West is largely useful as agitation-propaganda. If West articulates the failings of capitalism, its destructiveness and its vulnerability and offers a socialist alternative that captures media attention, then it will open areas of public discourse ordinarily closed. It's one way of raising consciousness.

[Jose Gracchus]

Maybe it'd be porn for us, but the establishment would use West as a pretext to mock and denounce "loonies" and the like. I agree with Chomsky; to a substantial extent it would only make the left look worse if they allowed us on as guests on MSNBC or the like since you'd never be able to explain what you meant and they would just box you in with rhetoric and framing.

The American electoral system, in particular, is evacuated of any progressive or substantive political content.

[CynicalIdealist]

I like the idea of him being an agitprop candidate.

[Geiseric]

I dont get the point of using all your time and recources on getting a guy to be president, which will never ever ever ever happen, while wisconsin and things most americans identify with and care about are going on, that they can actually effect and win with their recources

[∞]

C'mon we all know he'll lose. This shit just doesn't matter to me at all. Debbs was the most popular socialist to ever run for president and he only got 9% of the popular vote.

[chegitz guevara]

I dont get the point of using all your time and recources on getting a guy to be president, which will never ever ever ever happen, while wisconsin and things most americans identify with and care about are going on, that they can actually effect and win with their recources

When I run for Congress, I get calls from The Wall Street Journal. Scabby the Rat (http://www.revleft.com/vb/why-brian-moore-t133477/index.html) got on The Colbert Report. Imagine if we'd had someone competent on that show!

Running in elections gives us the biggest bang for our buck in terms of putting our politics before people. That's why it should be done.

[Robocommie]

And we'll be able to win people over to anti-capitalist politics by cloaking them in mild reformism? I really don't get it when people put up ideas like this...


"Mild" reformism is relative. Given the fact that the US right now is a clusterfuck between ultra-conservatives vs neoliberals, even genuine social democracy would be an extreme shift.

Unless you happen to think a full scale proletarian revolution is actually more likely to break out in the US, there's no reason to oppose it other than more leftist sectarian backbiting.

[Robocommie]

I dont get the point of using all your time and recources on getting a guy to be president, which will never ever ever ever happen, while wisconsin and things most americans identify with and care about are going on, that they can actually effect and win with their recources

Because if you let the Democrats hijack the Wisconsin situation and various other labor struggles, without making any kind of an attempt to put out a message about an alternative, no matter how mild it may be in contrast to full out revolution, then you're just ceding victory.

You can use an electoral platform to highlight situations like Wisconsin, point out the hypocrisies and bullshit of both the Dems and the GOP, and undermine people's confidence in either of them as a solution to their problems.

[RedSonRising]

This particular idea doesn't seem particularly feasible nor constructive, but a coalition of parties of that type with a broad network of organizations and community projects challenging the two party system would indeed be a revolutionary turn in US politics.

[Zeus the Moose]

"Mild" reformism is relative. Given the fact that the US right now is a clusterfuck between ultra-conservatives vs neoliberals, even genuine social democracy would be an extreme shift.

Unless you happen to think a full scale proletarian revolution is actually more likely to break out in the US, there's no reason to oppose it other than more leftist sectarian backbiting.

My point was more that, even if what people are going for are reform measures, then we'll need to be radical, militant force, because only through the threat of something more radical will any sort of meaningful reforms get enacted.

[Robocommie]

My point was more that, even if what people are going for are reform measures, then we'll need to be radical, militant force, because only through the threat of something more radical will any sort of meaningful reforms get enacted.

I can see the logic in what you're saying, I just think the main problem is that there isn't a very strong mainstream base right now for radical militancy. Anything that raises consciousness, and diverts existing militancy from avenues of false consciousness, is a good thing IMO.

[Rafiq]

Don't reformists get thrown into the gulag here?

[Geiseric]

This isn't reformism, its more along the lines of getting the word out and letting the working class know there's alternatives. However it'll have to be done perfectly, because most of the working class is brainwashed by neoliberal ''freedom! merika!'' nonsense, or even a stance of just vote democrat. However i'd probably support it on a stance of a just for now basis, it could be the start of something bigger.

[Revy]

This isn't reformism, its more along the lines of getting the word out and letting the working class know there's alternatives. However it'll have to be done perfectly, because most of the working class is brainwashed by neoliberal ''freedom! merika!'' nonsense, or even a stance of just vote democrat. However i'd probably support it on a stance of a just for now basis, it could be the start of something bigger.

P&F has jumped on the Nader bandwagon. The Green Party might nominate Cornel West though, if he actually expresses any interest in running. For the SP-USA to choose flip-flop Democrat Cornel West instead of Stewart Alexander, would be a betrayal of both Alexander and the party.

However, if Stewart Alexander (who is a P&F member in addition to an SP-USA member) wins the P&F nomination, then it would be a joint SP-USA/P&F ticket which is of course a very cool idea.

If the Green Party nominates Alexander, then the idea of this thread will be accomplished. He is going to be running for all three parties nominations. So it seems Cornel West wasn't the right guy to put in the title.

[Geiseric]

To be honest, i don't know much about SP USA politics. When i get home from work i'll read up on Alexander.

[S.Artesian]

Swaggasaurus Rex shares my sentiments exactly. I think we need a popular socialist running in 2012, even if he's reformist like West, because the alternative is to let the anti-socialist rhetoric aimed at Obama win the argument for the next political cycle.


Well, yeah, if anyone would care to run as a socialist, in opposition to the two major parties, as part of an organization that is an organic part or extension of the working class, or workers and poor.

So if MLK had ever done that, tried to form a political party based on Memphis, or a poor peoples' campaign, independent of the Repub-O-Crats, sure... of course he would have been shot sooner than he was shot if that had happened-- but yeah.

But West running as a DSA? Come on, the D is a big D and it stands for Democrat. Getting beyond his DSA connections? Come on again. Big D again.