Bored With Third Party Politics: Where Our Focus Should Lie

How long will it take until progressives realize that organizing around a third party is a waste of time? The wasted time and resources that people put into this "movement" is immeasurable when we consider the more constructive efforts we could redirect it towards. We do not have to look far to see the reality that exists: the electoral system is rigged to keep out alternatives and if an alternative does emerge to become a mainstream political party, it will indeed become mainstream in every way. The Green Party of Germany is a great example of what happens as the formerly pacifist party has now become a supporter of war and imperialism. Great social movements or the lack thereof determine the direction of our lives, not elections.

I think that it is important for us to focus on real, practical changes in our local communities. We have relied on the state to protect us and aid us for far too long. The fascist regime in the US serves as a wake up call to all of us fighting for a more just world. Even after the defeat of the fascists we will still face a country that has shifted far right. If John Kerry is elected, we will have an opening that we do not have currently have under Bush. We will have the wiggle room we have been missing for the past 4 years. But, the fact still remains that this is just the beginning. The world is at a crossroad and it is doubtful that Kerry will move in the right direction on his own. He will spend much time after the election proving he is just as tough and militaristic as Bush.

So, I believe a positive move for all of us is to refocus and move toward creating a model of what our future will be. How many of us, in our most visionary ideal, see state socialism as our goal? Not many. I think that most of us believe in the power of people to determine their own future. This can only happen through self and collective empowerment. This can only happen with self- organization. And, this is NOT an abstract idea, but can be practically instituted.

If we look at the autonomous movement of indigenous people in Mexico, we see an interesting model to look at. Last year, the Zapatista army officially resigned from its role as the center of political power in the communities of resistance. It was a bold and courageous move because as Subcommandante Marcos said those in the military cannot bring peace and leadership. It must come from civil society. The roots started after the 1985 earthquake in Mexico City. The ruling party, the PRI, for the first time did not respond in a paternal and authoritarian way. They provided no leadership whatsoever. People banded together to create their own rescue teams, their own aid workers, their own political leadership. And, in many ways, the EZLN grew out of that.

When the political power came back to the communities an amazing thing happened. They set up autonomous courts, schools, and hospitals. The courts or tribunals quickly became a source of fairness for EVERYONE. Indigenous people that were previously opposed to the Zapatista movement, that were aligned with the political parties or even with the paramilitary started to come to the autonomous courts for judgements. The council of judges apparently ruled in favor of who deserved it, rather than who was a supporter of the EZLN or not. What a great step forward through the model leadership of the Zapatistas! Hospitals, although lacking in medicine, provide help for all people, regardless of political view. The schools teach indigneous children that their culture has worth, that their language has worth.

What a great step forward if our communities that are full of neglected schools, run down hospitals, and corrupt courts began to form their own. It's only a first step, but it's an important one. It sure is more empowering than marching once every few months and then going home to watch the war in Iraq on television or hoping that Ralph Nader might pull the country to the left. These are concrete changes that haven't occurred since the free breakfast program and community health clinics provided by the Black Panther Party. These are really radical measures because they truly create a positive change. No doubt it would make those in power very nervous. What was the reaction of the US government following the social programs inacted by the Black Panthers? They started the US school breakfast program and began to put more money in those communities because they understood that the BPP was creating an alternative model to the almighty state.

Real, grassroot change is real democracy. The real impact will be in our rejection of the state and capital as paternalist dictators of our lives. We must create the new world with our hands, or otherwise it will remain an idealistic dream.

"What was the reaction of the US government following the social programs inacted by the Black Panthers? "

Do you mean after the assassination of its leaders?

We have a problem here in the USA and that is the brutal reactionary response in the form of bribes or threats or bullets. We first must form a militant and watchful self defense force that realizes that the ruling elite will not allow self-support particularly when it becomes effective.

That's why cointel pro was created.

When we realize that we are at war, we then will have focused on the primary problem. Even when the forces aligned against progressive movements can use extra legal means to crush, discredit or kill, we must use legal methods of mutual defense. It just requires more intelligence and less wishful thinking.

The reality is that, free breakfast programs to the contrary, conditions in the inner cities of the US are worse now than they were in the 1960's. Self-help programs are never going to end poverty any more than the private charities recommended by Herbert Hoover during the Great Depressin were able to do so. As long as capitalists control the state misery will not only exist but in many ways increase; and only a socialist state will be able to prevent them from coming back to power. Autonomous communes are'nt going to do that, any more than hippie colonies did in the 1960's. Besides, there are already some autonomous groups - like the Mafia, the militia movement, and the Nazi Party - which would make short work of the non-fascist ones.

To say that is not to wish for Stalinism, it is merely to face reality. A truly socialist state can absorb the positive aspects of anarcho-syndicalism, such as workplace democracy and powerful unions independent of the state. But attempting to abolish the state right after capitalism is ended is only going to guarantee the return of capitalism in a more virulent form - fascism.

As an American, the most fascinating aspect of these new institutions is that they are not sucked up into the government... but they become an alternate government.

I think Meyer is making a good point, but, the assumption that capitalism will be destroyed by a socialist revolution doesn't seem realistic. I think the politics of Zapatismo and anarchism really present a model for change. What I see in them is a total opposition to the status quo, followed by a rebuilding or reinvention with something that is better, but also imbued with an ideology that keeps it from being absorbed into the existing system.

These small institutions are the necessary first-steps toward building self-sufficiency skills, and uncovering the pre-existing cutlure of revolution in America. Do this for a few generations, and there will be a revolutionary base.

In the meantime, fight for health care. That's the winnable war. Destroy the crooks who run insurance companies. :-)

You've all made valid comments.

For "More Rational", I agree, of course. I think we need to look creatively at new models and new strategies such as zapatismo.

To the other commentor, you are right in saying that creating autonomous institutions will not destroy capitalism. Indeed, one of my points is that the means get co-opted...such as the free breakfast program. even FDR's new deal was an attempt to squash any revolution. But, it's a great model for what could happen, what the future could hold.

Would a post-revolutionary society require some sort of state to protect itself? Surely, in some form it would. But, the immediate move toward decentralization and direct democracy is necessary to prevent a new ruling class. We know that. My point is that creating alternative institutions BEFORE a revolution...the daily work of social revolution... should begin now. Instead of occasional marches and the like, we should get out there and create some concrete change. Don't get me wrong--we are doing that to a point now--there are great people doing great things every day, but there needs to be something bigger and more immediate.