What's the Matter With the Progressive Left?

The progressive talk station in Chicago, WCPT, recently replaced Santita Jackson as their morning host, from 6:00 to 8:00 a.m. with a program called Chews Views, with Richard Chew, which has taken a far different approach than the previous show.  Jackson, unfortunately, didn't seem to grasp that working to fragment the Democratic party for the benefit of her own narrow interests and views, would simply be the means by which Trump returns to the White House.  I didn't notice the change right away, because I quit listening to Jackson when she took the position of opening the door to third party fragmentation almost a year ago.  So this was a welcome change.  

And the discussions have trended in the direction of the self-inflicted wounding that progressives seem to be committed to promoting.  I've always tended to think of liberal progressives as open minded realists.  But some of what I'm observing, especially around the issue of the Israel-Gaza war, is causing me to think twice, and wonder whether they're just too ingrained in their own causes to think clearly and realistically, or whether the level of intelligence and reason with which they are equipped is not adequate to convince them they are being duped, and used by Trump to help him regain the White House and the Presidency.  

Progressives, by the very nature of their position, should have been horrified and sickened by the ruthless, cruelty and destruction of lives deliberately visited upon Israeli citizens in the areas of the country that were attacked on October 7th.  I don't care what's transpired over the past 80 years or so in Palestine, there's nothing that ever justifies that kind of violence and cruelty.  Be clear about that.  It does not help Hamas' cause, or that of the Palestinian people, to commit that kind of violence as a means of forcing some kind of political solution to what has been an insoluble problem up to this point.  

Ignoring, or somehow considering October 7th as justified, completely undermines any argument about the attacks on Gaza being "genocide," or over the edge as a means of defense against any future terrorist incursions into Israel.  Put this in perspective, if you're against violence, you're against all kinds of violence, and you believe that no violence is ever justified.  That's called "pacifism," and you're reading the words of a committed pacifist.  Don't waste time trying to find an argument around October 7th, there isn't a justifiable one from this perspective.  

But as far as Israel's attack on Gaza, well, if there's no justification for violence, then the brutal, destructive, deadly attacks raining down on Gaza are also not justified.  They are causing the death of innocent people on a scale that is so far thirty times greater than the October 7th attack caused.  It is creating a humanitarian crisis of huge proportions.  Those who have the power to influence what is happening should be using it, to the best of their ability, to put a stop to it and figure out a way to resolve these ongoing problems once and for all, not treating Palestinians as inferior people, or as displaced people not entitled to live in a land their ancestors have occupied for centuries.  

The United States has been involved in influence and pressure, direct and indirect, in affairs surrounding the establishment of an independent state of Israel since the British got possession of the Middle East after the first World War.  And the United States must be involved in finding a workable solution.  

How's that for a progressive perspective?  

The ONLY Chance for a Resolution That is Fair to the Palestinians is a Biden Presidency

Pushing a third-party candidacy, or staying home and refusing to vote for Biden in the upcoming election is a self-defeating strategy for progressives wanting to do something to stop the war and help the Palestinians in Gaza.  In our quirky electoral college system, syphoning votes off from Biden to third party candidates will help Trump get elected.  And let's be realistic about what will happen to the Palestinians in Gaza if that happens.  

There will be no Gaza when Netanyahu is done.  Trump has already said that Putin and Russia can "do whatever the hell they want."  Not only would he not try to stop Netanyahu, he would flood Israel with the bombs, missiles and weapons they need to wipe Gaza off the map.  Israel would be in full control of the Gaza Strip within weeks of a Trump inauguration.  The goal isn't a two state solution, something Netanyahu vehemently opposes.  It's to force emigration, scatter the population.  

No third party candidate will ever get close to the kind of voter support they will need to be elected, and there's not any third party candidate who is concerned about the real issues facing the United States in the 21st century, especially something like this.  Jill Stein and the Green Party are offering nothing that the Biden Administration hasn't already delivered, in their pro-worker, pro-climate change agenda.  Biden's already done more on that front than they are proposing.  I don't trust her judgement, or her true motives as a progressive, especially putting herself back on the ballot after what she did to Hillary Clinton in 2016.  

RFK Jr., aside from not having a snowball's chance on a hot stove of winning, has nothing to offer on this issue.  Of course, he still has to find the right words to define his campaign, for which a lot of people are waiting.  Aside from running on his late father's name and reputation of his family, I have not seen or heard anything from him to define him as a candidate, except that he keeps having to explain gaffes.  He will offer those who want to see an end to the violence in Gaza absolutely nothing. 

So let's be realistic, instead of following all the trendy social media chat, blaming Biden and ignoring the real issues.  If justice for Palestinians is at the top of your political agenda, President Biden is your candidate.  I know, with social media, and its plethora of misinformation being the primary source of information for the millennial generation, it's hard for them to understand politics that moves with experience.  Biden's original reactions were based on the horrific October 7th attacks.  I wonder how many people really got just how horrific and awful, and un-progressive that terrorist violence was.  But he's clearly been affected by the reaction from Israel, which now looks a lot more like retaliation, and a blatant disregard of Palestinian lives.  

Let's be more realistic.  The President cannot just stop sending military aid to Israel.  That money, appropriated by Congress, can only be rescinded by Congress, not the President.  And another realistic political perspective that needs to be understood is that nothing ever gets done without compromise and the gridlock we've seen in government when Republicans are in charge is the best example we have of that.  One of the reasons for the huge level of success of the Biden presidency on the pro-worker agenda he's built is that he knows how to make government work.  

Noting that historically, any time Jews have stood up to defend themselves against agression, the anti-semitic rhetoric ramps up significantly, it is becoming clear that what is happening to Gaza is far more than what is justified in what Netanyahu defined as a mission to rid Gaza of the presence of Hamas.  And the current President of the United States, who has exhibited the wisdom, judgment, discernment and experience in foreign policy that re-energized the NATO alliance and brought stability after the uncertainty caused by the wavering and dictator recognition of Trump, is the man who will bring about a resolution to the Gaza situation.  Unlike Trump, he's going to do the right thing, not use this for his own political gain.  

Learn Some Political Lessons 

Trump managed to win a very narrow victory in 2016, precisely because the infighting and bickering over "this and that" kind of issues among Progressives led to a lower voter turnout, and to votes going to third party candidates that were, frankly, a waste of time and effort.  A second Trump presidency would kill whatever progress the Green Party thinks they have made by running Stein and "getting their issues out there."  He was opposed to everything they stood for.  The best thing Jill Stein could do now is come out with a public statement recognizing the danger to democracy of a second Trump presidency, dropping out of the race and endorsing Joe Biden's candidacy.  That will do more for their pro-worker, anti-war, climate action agenda than her run for the White House again could ever achieve.  

The results of a second Trump Presidency are easy to see, since he's filling us in and gets whatever time in the news media he wants to tell everyone exactly what he would do.  Progressives like Santita Jackson and Rainbow Push, who is pushing the candidacy of Cornell West are the first targets on Trump's list, and whatever political progress they've made, which has been hard fought and hard earned, will be ended.  This man is a white supremacist bigot, and if groups like Rainbow Push stand alone, they have no power at all to stop him.  

I actually agree with Stein, that the two-party system is broken.  But her efforts to fix it have not only failed miserably, but they've actually caused further regression because they give control to far right elements who don't believe government works, and who deliberately sabotage its efforts.  On the other hand, President Joe Biden, with marginal, but with Democratic control of Congress, got more done in two years than any other President since the Johnson administration.  And that success was built on an alliance that came together against a common enemy, and defeated him.  

A second Biden Presidency will be the foundation of progressive political success.