This hasn't gotten more granular than asking candidates if they call themselves Democratic Socialists. We're going to have to do better than that. (Photo: Molly Adams/Flickr/cc)
Feb 24, 2019
It's that time of year again--when we're encouraged to celebrate Black history, and soon it will be Women's History Month--the time when people like me ask, "What about the rest of the year?"
This season, Black History Month coincides with the start of the presidential primary campaigns. On the Democratic side, we're already seeing journalists stretching for their pencils to divvy the candidates up. So far, the main divides they've identified seem to stem from which of the contenders lead with race and gender justice, and which want to sock it to the corporations.
This primary campaign is not going to be about where Democrats stand on things like abortion and marriage and voting rights, but rather on where they stand on property rights and public ownership and workplace democracy and taxes.
But those social vs economic distinctions aren't going to hold up for long when every last Democrat, for all their faults, is a civil rights paragon in contrast to the Klan-endorsed guy in the White House.
No, this primary campaign is not going to be about where Democrats stand on things like abortion and marriage and voting rights, but rather on where they stand on property rights and public ownership and workplace democracy and taxes. Much as they're out of practice, journalists are going to have to grapple with economics.
So far, this hasn't gotten more granular than asking candidates if they call themselves Democratic Socialists. We're going to have to do better than that.
Just as we need to get beyond the superficial celebration of abolitionist heroes to take a look at the ideas and assumptions that underpin white supremacy, so, too, we need to look at the lens through which we think about wealth.
Conveniently, the questions aren't that different. Are our life choices and outcomes determined by ourselves alone in an objective world free of bias? Are our successes affected by our individual character alone or also by social structures--things like systematic privilege? If the former, a few reforms will do; if the latter we need to shake things up.
Donald Trump is already throwing around invective about socialists. At the very least, we need a Socialist History Month to sort things out. May would be fine. Much better than that, we need to take a long, hard look at the ideology that underpins what we call capitalism. On that, like it or not, the clock is quite clearly ticking. If we have to have such a long campaign season, let's make it a season of great debates.
© 2023 Laura Flanders
Laura Flanders
Laura Flanders interviews forward-thinking people about the key questions of our time on The Laura Flanders Show, a nationally syndicated radio and television program also available as a podcast. A contributing writer to The Nation, Flanders is also the author of six books, including "Bushwomen: How They Won the White House for Their Man" (2005). She is the recipient of a 2019 Izzy Award for excellence in independent journalism, the Pat Mitchell Lifetime Achievement Award for advancing women's and girls' visibility in media, and a 2020 Lannan Cultural Freedom Fellowship for her reporting and advocacy for public media. lauraflanders.org
It's that time of year again--when we're encouraged to celebrate Black history, and soon it will be Women's History Month--the time when people like me ask, "What about the rest of the year?"
This season, Black History Month coincides with the start of the presidential primary campaigns. On the Democratic side, we're already seeing journalists stretching for their pencils to divvy the candidates up. So far, the main divides they've identified seem to stem from which of the contenders lead with race and gender justice, and which want to sock it to the corporations.
This primary campaign is not going to be about where Democrats stand on things like abortion and marriage and voting rights, but rather on where they stand on property rights and public ownership and workplace democracy and taxes.
But those social vs economic distinctions aren't going to hold up for long when every last Democrat, for all their faults, is a civil rights paragon in contrast to the Klan-endorsed guy in the White House.
No, this primary campaign is not going to be about where Democrats stand on things like abortion and marriage and voting rights, but rather on where they stand on property rights and public ownership and workplace democracy and taxes. Much as they're out of practice, journalists are going to have to grapple with economics.
So far, this hasn't gotten more granular than asking candidates if they call themselves Democratic Socialists. We're going to have to do better than that.
Just as we need to get beyond the superficial celebration of abolitionist heroes to take a look at the ideas and assumptions that underpin white supremacy, so, too, we need to look at the lens through which we think about wealth.
Conveniently, the questions aren't that different. Are our life choices and outcomes determined by ourselves alone in an objective world free of bias? Are our successes affected by our individual character alone or also by social structures--things like systematic privilege? If the former, a few reforms will do; if the latter we need to shake things up.
Donald Trump is already throwing around invective about socialists. At the very least, we need a Socialist History Month to sort things out. May would be fine. Much better than that, we need to take a long, hard look at the ideology that underpins what we call capitalism. On that, like it or not, the clock is quite clearly ticking. If we have to have such a long campaign season, let's make it a season of great debates.
Laura Flanders
Laura Flanders interviews forward-thinking people about the key questions of our time on The Laura Flanders Show, a nationally syndicated radio and television program also available as a podcast. A contributing writer to The Nation, Flanders is also the author of six books, including "Bushwomen: How They Won the White House for Their Man" (2005). She is the recipient of a 2019 Izzy Award for excellence in independent journalism, the Pat Mitchell Lifetime Achievement Award for advancing women's and girls' visibility in media, and a 2020 Lannan Cultural Freedom Fellowship for her reporting and advocacy for public media. lauraflanders.org
It's that time of year again--when we're encouraged to celebrate Black history, and soon it will be Women's History Month--the time when people like me ask, "What about the rest of the year?"
This season, Black History Month coincides with the start of the presidential primary campaigns. On the Democratic side, we're already seeing journalists stretching for their pencils to divvy the candidates up. So far, the main divides they've identified seem to stem from which of the contenders lead with race and gender justice, and which want to sock it to the corporations.
This primary campaign is not going to be about where Democrats stand on things like abortion and marriage and voting rights, but rather on where they stand on property rights and public ownership and workplace democracy and taxes.
But those social vs economic distinctions aren't going to hold up for long when every last Democrat, for all their faults, is a civil rights paragon in contrast to the Klan-endorsed guy in the White House.
No, this primary campaign is not going to be about where Democrats stand on things like abortion and marriage and voting rights, but rather on where they stand on property rights and public ownership and workplace democracy and taxes. Much as they're out of practice, journalists are going to have to grapple with economics.
So far, this hasn't gotten more granular than asking candidates if they call themselves Democratic Socialists. We're going to have to do better than that.
Just as we need to get beyond the superficial celebration of abolitionist heroes to take a look at the ideas and assumptions that underpin white supremacy, so, too, we need to look at the lens through which we think about wealth.
Conveniently, the questions aren't that different. Are our life choices and outcomes determined by ourselves alone in an objective world free of bias? Are our successes affected by our individual character alone or also by social structures--things like systematic privilege? If the former, a few reforms will do; if the latter we need to shake things up.
Donald Trump is already throwing around invective about socialists. At the very least, we need a Socialist History Month to sort things out. May would be fine. Much better than that, we need to take a long, hard look at the ideology that underpins what we call capitalism. On that, like it or not, the clock is quite clearly ticking. If we have to have such a long campaign season, let's make it a season of great debates.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.