The Democratic Party’s
Anti-Bernie Elites Have a Huge Stake in
Blaming Russia
By Norman Solomon
April 20, 2017 "Information
Clearing House"
- After
Hillary Clinton’s devastating loss nearly
six months ago, her most powerful Democratic
allies feared losing control of the party.
Efforts to lip-synch economic populism while
remaining closely tied to Wall Street had
led to a catastrophic defeat. In the
aftermath, the party’s progressive base --
personified by Bernie Sanders -- was in
position to start flipping over the
corporate game board.
Aligned with Clinton, the
elites of the Democratic Party needed to
change the subject. Clear assessments of the
national ticket’s failures were hazardous to
the status quo within the party. So were the
groundswells of opposition to unfair
economic privilege. So were the grassroots
pressures for the party to become a genuine
force for challenging big banks, Wall Street
and overall corporate power.
In short, the Democratic
Party’s anti-Bernie establishment needed to
reframe the discourse in a hurry. And -- in
tandem with mass media -- it did.
The reframing could be summed
up in two words: Blame Russia.
By early winter, the public
discourse was going sideways -- much to the
benefit of party elites. The meme of blaming
Russia and Vladimir Putin for the election
of Donald Trump effectively functioned to
let the Wall Street-friendly leadership of
the national Democratic Party off the hook.
Meanwhile, serious attempts to focus on the
ways that wounds to democracy in the United
States have been self-inflicted -- whether
via the campaign finance system or the
purging of minorities from voter rolls or
any number of other systemic injustices --
were largely set aside.
Fading from
scrutiny was the establishment that
continued to dominate the Democratic Party’s
superstructure. At the same time, its
devotion to economic elites was
undiminished. As Bernie
told
a reporter on the last day of February:
“Certainly there are some people in the
Democratic Party who want to maintain the
status quo. They would rather go down with
the Titanic so long as they have first-class
seats.”
Amid great
luxury and looming catastrophe, the party’s
current hierarchy has invested enormous
political capital in depicting Vladimir
Putin as an unmitigated arch villain.
Relevant
history
was irrelevant, to be ignored or denied.
With dutiful
conformity from most Democrats in Congress,
the party elites doubled, tripled and
quadrupled down on the emphatic claim that
Moscow is the capital of, by any other name,
an evil empire. Rather than just calling for
what’s needed -- a truly independent
investigation into allegations that the
Russian government interfered with the U.S.
election -- the party line became
hyperbolic and unmoored
from the available evidence.
Given their
vehement political investment in demonizing
Russia’s President Putin, Democratic leaders
are oriented to seeing the potential of
detente with Russia as counterproductive in
terms of their electoral strategy for 2018
and 2020. It’s a calculus that boosts the
risks of nuclear annihilation, given the
very real
dangers
of escalating tensions between Washington
and Moscow.
Along the way, top party
officials seem bent on returning to a kind
of pre-Bernie-campaign doldrums. The new
chair of the Democratic National Committee,
Tom Perez, can't bring himself to say that
the power of Wall Street is antithetical to
the interests of working people. That
reality came to painful light this week
during a live appearance on national
television.
During a
10-minute joint
interview
along with Bernie Sanders on Tuesday night,
Perez was a font of exactly the kind of
trite empty slogans and worn-out platitudes
that oiled the engines of the dismal Clinton
campaign.
While Sanders was forthright,
Perez was evasive. While Sanders talked
about systemic injustice, Perez fixated on
Trump. While Sanders pointed to a way
forward for realistic and far-reaching
progressive change, Perez hung onto a
rhetorical formula that expressed support
for victims of the economic order without
acknowledging the existence of victimizers.
In an incisive
article
published by The Nation magazine,
Robert Borosage wrote last week: “For all
the urgent pleas for unity in the face of
Trump, the party establishment has always
made it clear that they mean unity under
their banner. That’s why they mobilized to
keep the leader of the Congressional
Progressive Caucus, Representative Keith
Ellison, from becoming head of the DNC. It’s
why the knives are still out for Sanders and
those who supported him.”
No
Advertising - No Government Grants - This Is
Independent Media
While Bernie is hardly a
reliable opponent of U.S. war policies, he
is significantly more critical of U.S.
military intervention than the Democratic
Party leaders who often champion it.
Borosage noted that the party establishment
is locked into militaristic orthodoxies that
favor continuing to inflict the kind of
disasters that the United States has brought
to Iraq, Libya and other countries:
“Democrats are in the midst of a major
struggle to decide what they stand for and
who they represent. Part of that is the
debate over a bipartisan interventionist
foreign policy that has so abjectly failed.”
For the
Democratic Party’s most hawkish wing --
dominant from the top down and allied with
Clinton’s de facto neocon approach to
foreign policy -- the U.S. government’s
April 6 cruise missile attack on a Syrian
airfield was an indication of real leverage
for more war. That attack on a close ally of
Russia showed that incessant
Russia-baiting of Trump
can get gratifying military results for the
Democratic elites who are undaunted in their
advocacy of regime change in Syria and
elsewhere.
The
politically motivated
missile attack on Syria showed just how
dangerous
it is to keep Russia-baiting Trump, giving
him political incentive to prove how tough
he is on Russia after all. What’s at stake
includes the imperative of preventing a
military clash between the world’s two
nuclear superpowers. But the corporate hawks
at the top of the national Democratic Party
have other priorities.
Norman Solomon is the
coordinator of the online activist group
RootsAction.org and the executive
director of the Institute for Public
Accuracy. He is the author of a dozen books
including “War Made Easy: How Presidents and
Pundits Keep Spinning Us to Death.”
http://www.normansolomon.com
The
views expressed in this article are solely those
of the author and do not necessarily reflect the
opinions of Information Clearing House.
In accordance
with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material
is distributed without profit to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving the
included information for research and educational
purposes. Information Clearing House has no
affiliation whatsoever with the originator of
this article nor is Information ClearingHouse
endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)