All posts by tedglick

To Each According to Their Need/Work

Future Hope

“All who believed were together and had all things in common; they would sell their possessions and goods and distribute the proceeds to all, as any had need. . . [they] were of one heart and soul and no one claimed private ownership of any possessions, but everything they owned was held in common. . . There was not a needy person among them.”   the New Oxford Annotated Bible, the book of Acts, chapter 2, verses 44-45 and chapter 4, verses 32 and 34

These words, written almost 2,000 years ago, reveal one major reason why, after Jesus of Nazareth was killed by the Roman empire, his First Century teachings and life example lived on in the hearts, minds and actions of growing numbers of people in Palestine and, increasingly, beyond. The Christian organization met not just the spiritual needs of the masses of Jewish peasants but their very practical needs.

Here is how European socialist leader Karl Kautsky put it in the early 20th century in his important book, Foundations of Christianity: “Jesus was not merely a rebel, he was also a representative and a champion, perhaps even the founder of an organization which survived him and continued to increase in numbers and in strength. It was the organization of the congregation [and its practical serving of people’s survival needs] that served as a bond to hold together Jesus’ adherents after his death. It was the vigor and strength of the congregation that created the belief in the continued life of the Messiah.”

Karl Marx did more than any other person to spread the slogan summing up this early Christian philosophy of action, using the phrase, “from each according to their ability, to each according to their need.” He wrote this in his 1875 book, Critique of the Gotha Program. But earlier socialists, Christian socialists, particularly Henri de Saint Simon, had used a similar phrase, using the word “work” instead of “need,” but with the same basic intent, in the 1820’s.

Since 1917 there have been socialist revolutions with the objective of creating societies motivated by this visionary approach. Unfortunately, and to be generous, those efforts have not been too successful. The Russian revolution clearly failed, and China is very far from being anything close to the kind of socialist society hoped for by 19th century founders of scientific socialism like Marx, Engels and others. Cuba has made heroic efforts to maintain the socialist vision and make it real, but the decades-long US blockade and other difficulties have undercut those efforts. Other smaller countries which have tried to build socialist societies in this world dominated by the ideology and the reality of mega-corporate, militaristic capitalism have had similar problems.

Does this mean this originally Christian, then socialist vision is an anachronism, no longer relevant in today’s world? I say “no,” a very loud “NO!” Indeed, it is just this vision which those of us committed to working for a very different world must hold onto and translate into daily acts and new forms of organization which embody it.

The original thinkers and leaders of scientific socialism in the 19th and 20th century—almost all of them men, by the way, a very big problem itself—believed that societies living by the words, “from each according to their ability, to each according to their need,” or “their work,” were on the agenda of history because of the development of industry and technology. With this economic development the conditions were being laid for masses of working people to learn from experience as they were forced into large, oppressive workplaces, learn how to join together to improve their and their families’ lives. Over time, this would lead to a replacement of rule by rich capitalists and their enablers in government with a true democracy of working people, the vast majority.

But the industrial working class was very small in China and Russia, both predominantly peasant societies with much less industry compared to Europe and the US. They therefore had less experience with mass organization, a prerequisite to having any chance of systemic change.

Fortunately today, “a different kind of movement is building in the US and elsewhere for fundamental social change. And because the US is a wealthy society, it is practically possible for that movement, when it wins, to rapidly take steps toward a much more just distribution of wealth and power, much healthier social and economic relationships based on cooperation and higher love instead of individualistic competition, and protection for and healing of our threatened climate and environment as a top level priority.” 2)

What should we be doing right now to advance toward these goals? It’s clear to me that for those of us in the US, we need to be going all out to defeat the fascist threat Trump and MAGA represent by doing all we can to bring out an anti-Trump vote for Kamala Harris in the battleground states of Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Georgia, Nevada and Arizona. Our deeply disrupted climate cannot be made even worse by four years of Trump/MAGA domination. Conversely, their electoral defeat will strengthen and expand our building, independent progressive movement.

There is no more important work right now.

1—Foundations of Christianity: A Study in Christian Origins. Monthly Review Press, 1972, pps. 376-378

2—21st Century Revolution: Through Higher Love, Racial Justice and Democratic Cooperation, by Ted Glick

Ted Glick has been a progressive activist, organizer and writer since 1968. He is the author of the recently published books, Burglar for Peace and 21st Century Revolution. More info can be found at https://tedglick.com. 

Door-Knocking Trump Households

Future Hope, ,

It’s great what happened yesterday, in so many ways, after Biden’s stepping down announcement and then endorsement of Harris. And it’s even better that as of now it looks very unlikely that anyone of substance is going to challenge her being the Presidential nominee.

The energy and funds generated less than 24 hours after these announcements by Biden are another very good sign. This morning, watching the news, it was a small thing but of note to see the new, virtually certain, Democratic Presidential candidate walking crisply and confidently down the steps of a plane. It may be a small thing, but for many voters they want leaders who radiate strength, energy and confidence, so this has importance. Trump does this but with no regard for the truth or falsehood of what he says. Kamala Harris does this but in an opposite way as far as truth-telling.

Any day now we’ll start hearing all of the lies and half-truths and distortions of Harris’ positions on issues and personal history from the Trumpists. There will also be criticisms from both the Left and the Democratic Party Right about weaknesses and problematic, past Harris positions or actions. It’d be nice if those criticisms were more constructive than destructive given the fascist, racist, misogynistic, climate-denying alternative.

For myself, as someone who has been about independent progressive politics since 1975, I have no problem being upfront about the clearly correct tactical necessity of doing a lot of work and donating money to defeat the MAGA Republicans.

One tactical campaign idea I’ve had since the big Biden announcements yesterday afternoon is this: if it’s the case, as looks very possible, that there are going to be huge numbers of people stepping forward to volunteer for this historic campaign, some of them should, in an organized way, go door to door in neighborhoods in key battleground states that are pro-Trump areas. Probably not so much in the hardest core areas but I could see doing so in areas that went to Trump by upwards of 25% in 2020.

What would be the objective of this canvassing? While id’ing and encouraging Harris supporters would, of course, be one objective, another potentially critical one will be to raise enough questions in the minds of right-now-Trump voters that some of them will end up not voting for him when they vote this fall.

It’s important to appreciate the reality that some, at least 20% I’d say, of those who tell pollsters that they will be voting for Trump this fall are not diehard MAGA supporters. They are people who, if reached out to and spoken with over the phone or in person by well-trained canvassers, could end up deciding that they are too conflicted about Trump, and probably Harris too, such that they end up not voting for him when they vote this fall.

There’s another reason why this should be one component of a multi-faceted Harris campaign, both the official Democratic Party operation and those of more independent groups.

Whoever wins the White House, the House, the Senate and state legislatures this fall, progressives, particularly anti-racist white progressives, need to much more broadly interact with those working-class white people who support MAGA. There are a lot of bad reasons why they’re doing so but one understandable reason is past Democratic support for NAFTA and other policies that led to massive job losses over the last 50 years. Given the positive job creation numbers under the Biden/Harris administration, we have something to say about a different reality today on this, and on other, issues.

It is wrong to write off all MAGA supporters!

I live in New Jersey, an hour drive away from key battleground state Pennsylvania. I am so looking forward to going there many times over the next 3 ½ decisive months to do this kind of work. History is calling.

Ted Glick has been a progressive activist, organizer and writer since 1968. He is the author of the recently published books, Burglar for Peace and 21st Century Revolution. More info can be found at https://tedglick.com. 

The Trump Shooting

Future Hope, , , ,

You don’t need to be a pacifist to regret the attempt on Trump’s life yesterday. The MAGA fascists are not going to be defeated on November 5th, as well as beyond this election, by physical attacks, with guns or otherwise.

What will defeat them? Right now I would say there are two main things:

-In the short run, over the next four months, there needs to be a coming together of a massive and broad united front to mobilize tens of millions of people to come out and vote on November 5th for Biden/Harris, particularly in the battleground states, as well as for progressive and not-so-progressive Democrats for the House and Senate in every state. The exception would be If there were any progressive independents like Bernie Sanders running for Congress who had a real chance of winning, though I don’t know of any.

-Day-after-day organizing must deepen and expand beyond November 5th by progressive groups, increasingly connected, all over the country, including in the rural, small town and outer suburban areas where Trump/MAGA is strongest. Door-to-door and other outreach must be stepped up on Issues that are important to most of those in that overwhelmingly white, MAGA-friendly base, like health care, affordable housing and decent-paying union jobs, but without hiding our progressive approach on issues like racism, sexism, heterosexism, the climate crisis, militarism, etc.

Already, unsurprisingly, prominent MAGA Republican leaders like Mike Johnson and JD Vance are blaming Biden and the Democrats for this shooting. Vance, very possibly about to be Trump’s Vice Presidential candidate, said yesterday after the shooting, “”Today is not just some isolated incident. The central premise of the Biden campaign is that President Donald Trump is an authoritarian fascist who must be stopped at all costs. That rhetoric led directly to President Trump’s attempted assassination.” Bullshit.

This is why nonviolent tactics must be the kind of tactics we use as we unite to defeat Trump/MAGA this November and keep building afterwards. This doesn’t mean rejecting self defense. It does mean, imho, that there needs to be a widespread appreciation within our people’s progressive movement that a willingness to risk physical attacks or jail time, or worse, is part of the way we can win. Doing so keeps a focus on the issues we are taking action on, and it brings more people to our side.

Jim Crow segregation in the South would never have been defeated if not for the willingness of the young people of SNCC, SCLC, other groups, and grassroots Black working-class people to do just this. Their courage and sacrifices, their singing and spirit, were contagious and politically effective despite tremendous repression by the FBI, racists and southern power structures.

In the words of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. on April 4th, 1967, “Our only hope today lies in our ability to recapture the revolutionary spirit and go out into a sometimes hostile world declaring eternal hostility to poverty, racism and militarism,” and more.

Ted Glick has been a progressive activist, organizer and writer since 1968. He is the author of the recently published books, Burglar for Peace and 21st Century Revolution. More info can be found at https://tedglick.com. 

The Aging Process Always Wins

Future Hope, , , ,

Joe Biden’s debate performance and the information that has come out since of other hidden-from-the-public signs of his declining cognitive condition have reminded me of a similar situation I experienced decades ago with one of the 20th century’s leading peace and justice activists, Dave Dellinger.

I had the privilege of working closely with Dave from the 70’s until the early 2000’s in the movement to end the war in Vietnam, for a mass progressive alternative to the Democrats and Republicans, for freedom for Leonard Peltier, and as part of the movement in 1992 to reject government plans to celebrate the 500th year of Christopher Columbus’ arrival in the Westen Hemisphere in 1492. In that year he and I and another dozen or so people took part in an organized People’s Fast For Justice and Peace in the Americas, a 42-day water-only fast on the steps of the US Capitol. 

The last meeting where we were together was a national “progressive dialogue” meeting I helped to organize in December of 2000, after the George Bush vs. Al Gore 2000 Presidential election. For several years in the early 2000’s there were meetings of a multi-racial, youth-and-elders cross section of leading progressive activists, convened for the explicit purpose of strengthening our connections so that we could play a more effective role in opposing two-party, corporate rule.

Dave was not himself at that meeting. He was still articulate, but he was also over the top in the way he expressed himself. I remember him demanding that people agree with his ideas as far as what we should be doing. He was not a positive force in the meeting. I had never seen him the way that he was then.

Dave was 85 at the time of this meeting, one year younger than Joe Biden will be if he is chosen next month at the Democratic Convention as their Presidential candidate, if he defeats fascist Trump and then makes it to the end of a second four year term as President.

Immediately after the June 27 debate debacle I could see no way that Biden could continue to be the Democratic Presidential candidate. But that now seems more likely after Biden’s very different performance in the George Stephanopoulus ABC TV interview last Friday, his North Carolina and Wisconsin rallies, as well as the just-expressed support for Biden by the Congressional Black Caucus, the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, Bernie Sanders, AOC and others.

There’s no doubt that Vice President Kamala Harris has become a very consequential person going forward, and not just because she’s who would step in if (imho, probably when) Biden and those around him agree that he can’t make it until the end of 2028 and needs to step down.

I haven’t been much of a fan of Harris, based mainly on her performance during the 2019-2020 Democratic Presidential primary campaign. But I have been noticing that she seems more confident, more forceful and clear over the last month or so. And according to Michael Moore, “for over 8 months, it has been reported that Kamala Harris has pushed for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza.” This squares up with comments she made about Gaza and the war this March in Selma, Alabama.

For me and clearly others, a Biden/Harris slate in which Harris plays a visible and public role, showing us and the country, I hope, that she is prepared to step in if Biden falters and he realizes it’s time to step aside—that seems to me like a potential winning ticket.

For me, for Biden, for all of us, it’s 100% certain that if we make it into our retirement years, we can expect to experience the slings and arrows of the aging process, no doubt about it. When we start to experience bad days, poor performances, memory lapses, at an increasing rate, adjustments will be necessary to match what we want to do with what we can do. Those close to Biden have a responsibility not to deny reality but to help him adjust accordingly when it’s clear it’s his time to retire.

Ted Glick has been a progressive activist, organizer and writer since 1968. He is the author of the recently published books, Burglar for Peace and 21st Century Revolution. More info can be found at https://tedglick.com. 

Is Gaza Disqualifying for Biden?

Future Hope, , , ,

Several days ago I received an email from a good friend who had just come back from the West Bank in Palestine. My friend has been connected with Palestinians and active in the movement against Israel’s brutal occupation for a very long time.

One line of her email gave me pause: “When you think of voting for Biden, remember that this horror is of his making.”

I have been active since last October in the US movement demanding an end to US support of Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza, an end to Israel’s decades-long occupation, and for self-determination and justice for the Palestinian people. I’ve participated in weekly Friday street vigils in a nearby town every week that I am home. I’ve written about this issue. I’ve made phone calls to elected officials demanding they call for an immediate ceasefire and massive humanitarian aid for Gaza. But I think to encourage people not to vote for Biden/the Democratic candidate on the basis of this issue is very problematic for two reasons.

1–The next US President is going to be either Trump or whoever the Democrats eventually nominate. As problematic as the Biden Administration’s positions and actions have been for most of the last nine months since October 7, it is a fact that, because of the widespread popular revulsion against Israel’s actions in Gaza, the massive activist movement demonstrating in the streets and the constant pressure brought from within the Democratic Party by its progressive wing, the Biden team a couple of months ago finally began to use its leverage over the Netanyahu regime to demand that they change their tactics, with some success.

Does anyone think that Trump and the Republicans would be a better alternative when it comes to Palestine? Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson, with Trump’s support, is bringing Netanyahu to the US to speak publicly from the floor of the House in late July!

2–In general, I don’t think a candidate’s position on any one issue alone should be how progressives decide who to vote for, especially in this Presidential election. I think it is important to look at both the overall program and the past actions on all the major issues by candidates, as well as whether or not a candidate has any chance of winning, or perhaps not winning but generating such a big vote that the progressive mass movement will be advanced despite a loss.

On issue after issue Biden and the Democrats, despite their ties to big money and corporate power, are better than Trump and the Republicans: the climate emergency, women’s rights, abortion rights, voting rights, racial justice, lgbtq+ rights, labor rights, democratic rights and the right to organize and demonstrate, to name just some of the huge differences.

Of course, there are two Presidential candidates whose positions have been strong on the Gaza war and on these other issues, Cornel West and Jill Stein. But neither of them will win the Presidential election or draw very many votes, as reflected in Stein’s past voting results and current, month-after-month polling results. The primary, immediate practical result of their campaigns will be to draw votes away from the Democratic candidate and increase the odds that Trump wins.

There is one thing they could do which would change this inevitable result. They could publicly call for their supporters to vote their conscience, at least, if not for them to vote for the Democratic nominee, in the battleground states like Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Georgia, Nevada and Arizona. They could acknowledge the existential threat posed by the MAGA movement. So far this hasn’t happened.

For the planet, for the people, for our rights, for democracy, Trump and MAGA must be defeated at the ballot box on November 5th.

Ted Glick has been a progressive activist, organizer and writer since 1968. He is the author of the recently published books, Burglar for Peace and 21st Century Revolution. More info can be found at https://tedglick.com. 

The Problems with Purism and Reformism (not reforms)

Future Hope, , , ,

Over 20 years ago I wrote one of these columns examining the issue of “purism” versus “pragmatism” when it comes to organizing for systemic and desperately needed change in this world. I wrote about two essential ingredients that are sometimes in conflict.

One essential is conscious political organization motivated by principles and a genuine desire and plan for improving the lives of the disenfranchised and downtrodden, ending militarism and war, and stopping and reversing environmental devastation. But this alone won’t bring about change.

As a once-great revolutionary once said, “the masses make history.” It is only when large numbers of people identify with a movement for fundamental change and support it, verbally or actively, that we have any hope of winning political power and transforming society. In the USA that means not tens of thousands, or hundreds of thousands, or even millions, but tens of millions of people.

Is this possible? Yes. One big example is the 15 million votes independent socialist Bernie Sanders got in 2016. Another is the NY Times report that 16-25 million people all over the country took demonstrative action in the spring of 2021 after George Floyd was murdered.

We need to go about our organizing work in a way which doesn’t undercut either, which avoids the temptation to be so committed to being principled that one becomes purist and narrow, on the one hand, or to be so committed to being with and interacting with “the masses” that problematic positions are taken and political relationships are built that end up deflecting energies into reformist and dead-end approaches to change. We need reforms, yes, but our broader objective must be to build upon successful struggles for major reforms in a way that leads to truly revolutionary, justice-grounded, social and economic transformation.

Purism versus reformism—the twin dangers of serious efforts to bring about the kind of change that is so, so needed today.

What can be done to lessen these dangers, to increase the possibilities that more of us will keep our eyes, minds and hearts on the prize?

One is the building of independent and progressive organizations that are truly democratic in the fullest sense of the term. As difficult as the process of democracy sometimes is, it is also a way to keep the group as a whole and the individuals within it centered on the stated objectives. Democratic process, sooner or later, frustrates individual power plays on the part of any person in leadership who lets power go to his/her/their head and who becomes either purist or reformist as a result. These things have happened much too much historically, but in this third decade of the 21st century, there is a growing consciousness of this danger increasingly expressed in how more and more of us are going about our organization-building.

Another necessity is an explicit commitment to the testing out of theories and ideas in practice and a process of constant evaluation based upon input from the people the ideas are being tried out on. If an independent candidate is running for office, for example, and has what they think is a great platform but the vote totals are very low, perhaps the problem is that the issues being addressed, or the way they’re being expressed, don’t connect with peoples’ understandings. Since just about any issue can be addressed from a progressive standpoint, a much better approach is to identify what the issues are to speak about because of day-to-day listening to and communicating with working-class people and people of the global majority.

The same with forms of direct action. It may feel good and righteous to some to stand up to the police during an action, but if that is done in a way which makes it easier for the government and the corporate-dominated press to call us violent, that will not generate sympathy for our cause among the wider public. Expressing our sense of urgency and anger is a good thing, if done wisely. Expressing it without political consideration of an action’s impacts is not a good thing.

Ultimately, our ability as a movement to navigate between the dangers of purism and reformism comes down to how each of us live our lives. Do we live in such a way that, on a day to day basis, we are in touch with working class people, regular folks, those in need of change? Do those of us who are white ensure that, in some way, we have regular communication and interaction with people of color so that we are constantly reminded about racism and its pernicious effects? Do we make time for meditation, allow our conscience to make itself heard over the daily demands on our time and energies? Do we interact with others in a way which prioritizes listening and objective consideration? Do we struggle to keep from responding defensively when others make constructive, or not so constructive, criticisms of us?

In the words of the late Rev. Paul Mayer, “What history is calling for is nothing less than the creation of a new human being. We must literally reinvent ourselves through the alchemy of the Spirit or perish. We are being divinely summoned to climb another rung on the evolutionary ladder, to another level of human consciousness.”

 Ted Glick has been a progressive activist, organizer and writer since 1968. He is the author of the recently published books, Burglar for Peace and 21st Century Revolution. More info can be found at https://tedglick.com. 

Living to Fight Another Day

Future Hope, , , ,

“UE rarely makes endorsements within the two-party system, and we are not endorsing Biden. Instead, our hope for the future lies in a politically independent labor movement, and in those politicians in Congress and at the state and local level who are willing to put the working class first, not the Democratic Party. We encourage working people not to be completely distracted by the Presidential horse-race, and to pay close attention to their Congressional and state races.

“Nonetheless, we have to be honest about the dilemma that faces labor and working people in the short term. The issue that makes Biden the lesser evil for us is the fact that the labor movement, and especially UE, has been making some real gains in organizing new workers under Biden’s economic policies and NLRB. A second Trump presidency would make it far more difficult to organize — and to build the labor party we need and deserve.

“Given who will be on the ballot in November, we urge all working people to hold their nose and vote for Biden, in order to live to fight another day — the cost of re-electing Trump would be too high.”

-from “The Stakes of the 2024 Election,” issued by the United Electrical Workers Union: https://www.ueunion.org/political-action/2024/the-stakes-of-the-2024-election


Way back in the 70’s when I first became involved in organized efforts to form an alternative to the Democrats and Republicans, I had many meetings in the headquarters of the national UE. At the time, before their move to Pittsburgh, those headquarters were in midtown Manhattan, right across from St. Patrick’s Cathedral in a building that, I believe, used to be owned by the Vanderbilt family.

The UE describes itself as “the USA’s only national, independent, membership-run union (since 1936), representing thousands of workers in the private and public sectors.” As is true today, back in the 70’s they believed that working people in the USA need an alternative to the Dems and Reps, which then and now they describe as a “labor party.”

I had this privilege of meeting in their building because their General Counsel was Bob Lewis, and Bob was a leader of a group initiated by civil rights lawyer Arthur Kinoy in 1974, the Mass Party Organizing Committee. When I became involved with MPOC in 1975 and moved to NYC to work in its national office, we would often have evening meetings in Bob’s office.

So when I saw the UE’s statement on the Presidential elections a few days ago, I read it closely, respecting them as I do.

I pretty much agree with their conclusion, quoted above, that all working people should vote for Biden and also pay close attention to Congressional and state races. At the same time, given that it is the electoral college which determines who wins the Presidency, I think it is strategically key to emphasize the absolute importance of this happening in the battleground states: Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Georgia, Arizona and Nevada. In the vast majority of the other states, the likely winner is pretty much known based on past voting history.

The UE statement criticizes Biden for his unwillingness to take on corporations, for not doing enough “to rein in the power of the oil and gas industry,” for not taking action “to address the broken criminal justice system,” for not dealing with the underlying causes of immigration, the “failed economic and military policies toward Latin America,” and his failure to halt “Israel’s attack on the Palestinian people”  and the “stoking of a ‘new cold war” with Russia and China.

They go on to critique Trump, not a hard thing to do, referring to “his rhetoric taking on an increasingly fascist tone” and using the language of “vermin,” “human scum” and “poisoning the blood of our country” as far as immigrants.

I liked the phrase they used to conclude their statement: “vote for Biden in order to live to fight another day.”

Political dynamics in a country, definitely in the USA, are not stagnant. There is a rise and fall as far as movements around issues and movements for major political change. One current example is the difference between this Presidential election and the ones in 2016 and 2020. In both those years there were strong and visible progressive challenges via the Bernie Sanders, and then Sanders and Warren, campaigns. Sanders got 15 million votes in the 2016 Democratic primary, helping to generate a progressive political upsurge that has not gone away, even if there is no mass-based challenger to corporatist Biden this year either from within the Democratic Party or from a “third party.”

On the issues I agree much more with Presidential candidates like Jill Stein and Cornell West, but they are stuck in the very low single digits in all polls. The biggest impact they could have on the Presidential race is to help elect Trump. True!

What will happen after November 5 if Biden/Harris win? Almost certainly, the independent progressive forces will feel strengthened and revitalized, in a position to build upon that victory going forward.

But first things first: the defeat of Trump by voting for Biden. He’s a lesser evil, but he’s not a racist, misogynist, narcissistic fascist. Trump and MAGA Must Be Defeated.

 Ted Glick has been a progressive activist, organizer and writer since 1968. He is the author of the recently published books, Burglar for Peace and 21st Century Revolution. More info can be found at https://tedglick.com. 

For Our Children and Grandchildren

Future Hope, , , ,

People gonna rise like the waters,
Gonna calm this crisis down,
I hear the voice of my great granddaughter
Saying keep it in the ground.
-sung for years at climate justice actions in the USA

32 years ago the phrase, “it’s the economy, stupid!,” was used by the Clinton for President operation as the primary message of that successful Presidential campaign. It seems to me that there are very good reasons why, in 2024, those of us who are working to defeat Trump, whether independent of or inside the Biden/Harris operation, and who are supporting genuinely progressive candidates otherwise, should be using and advocating for something else.

I believe it should be the phrase, “For Our Children and Grandchildren.”

The primary reason is because it is absolutely on point with our reality in 2024, particularly, but not only, because of the seriousness of the climate emergency. Human society is in a race to get off fossil fuels and onto wind, solar and other renewables before it is too late. We are literally in the make-or-break decade. It is so serious that three years ago the very establishment International Energy Agency called for an end to the buildout of any new fossil fuel infrastructure as of that year, 2021.

Unfortunately, particularly in the United States, that call has not been sufficiently heeded. The primary reason is the power of the oil and gas industry over almost all Republican and far too many Democratic politicians at both state and federal levels. Huge campaign donations and corporate support in other ways continue to have their corrupting, destructive impact.

As a progressive activist and organizer for a very long time, I’ve found that when I say we need to bring about major societal change because we need a better world for our children and grandchildren, it has an effect. The song quoted above is another example, a way of bringing into our present struggles the generations coming after us who we must be responsible to. Within many Indigenous cultures the concept of taking action with the seventh generation in mind is very strong and deeply rooted.

The idea of looking out for our children and grandchildren and those coming after us can connect people who otherwise would be on opposite sides of an issue. As one example, I increasingly find myself saying to police at demonstrations, including to some who are arresting me, that I and those with me are taking action for their children and grandchildren too, and I have seen on their faces, and sometimes heard in their words, that they relate to this idea. In their own ways they are worried about the state of the country and world and how their offspring will survive in it.

Just recently, during an action at the DC headquarters of FERC, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, a Federal Protective Services higher-up in charge of policing us actually said to a group of us as we were leaving, unprompted, that “we appreciate what you are doing.”

This concept of the welfare of those coming after us as a primary motivation for our actions today is not just climate-related. It’s true for many issues. I’ve read of formerly enslaved Africans in the deep South explicitly referencing their children and grandchildren as the reason they were willing to risk their lives to end slavery. Today, the MAGA attacks on the rights of immigrants, women, people of color, lgbtq+ people and low-income, low-wealth families, are a huge threat to those coming atter us if Trump wins and Republicans do well in Congressional races. And clearly a Trump-led government would be a huge threat to US democracy, as flawed as it is, and a boost to neo-fascists worldwide.

11 years ago I took part in a Walk For Our Grandchildren and Mother Earth, a 100 mile walk of elders and others from Camp David to Harpers Ferry to the White House. The walk struck a chord and got national media coverage. Eight years later I was part of a similar walk in 2021 from Scranton, Pa. to Wilmington, De., ending up in Biden’s home town. In Wilmington we rallied close to Biden’s home and then concluded it with a civil disobedience action at the national headquarters of Chase Bank, one of the big banks funding oil, coal and gas corporations that are the main drivers of the climate chaos that is jeopardizing a livable future.

Our children and grandchildren must be openly and publicly at the center of what we do and why we do it.

 Ted Glick has been a progressive activist, organizer and writer since 1968. He is the author of the recently published books, Burglar for Peace and 21st Century Revolution. More info can be found at https://tedglick.com. 

Trump’s 33 Minutes

Future Hope

Neo-fascist Trump spoke publicly on Friday the day after a jury in NYC convicted him on 34 counts related to election tampering in 2016. I heard on the news about this speech and decided I should listen to it, see for myself what he said, how he said it and what the reaction was from his supporters listening live.

The most striking thing to me was how at the very beginning and at the very end Trump focused on the issue of immigration. He did so in his usual racist way, stating clearly that “we’re losing our country.” He said, as if it was happening all over the country, that “we can’t have little league baseball anymore because of migrants in tents on baseball fields.” He threw in “we’re living in a fascist state” within this immigration context.

For Trump, his campaign is a last stand for the so-called “white race.”

Also of note was Trump’s body language. For almost the entire 33 minutes, he looked in one direction, off to the side. He never looked in the direction of the cameras and only once, maybe twice, looked to the other side. It’s like he was in a trance, possessed by some strange force.

There were no jokes or humor in this speech.

Of some note is the fact that after receiving applause at the beginning from his supporters, there was only one more time that they applauded until the speech ended. It’s like they were thrown off by his crazy demeanor and hard to follow lines of attack.

In between his racist attacks on immigrants, the rest of his speech was lie after lie, attacks on the US legal system, incoherent rantings often about things that had no relation to his conviction or even his Presidential candidacy.

The possibility of this sick, evil and deranged man being President should motivate everyone who believes in basic human decency and elections-not-dictators, from the ultra left to centrists and even rightists. Nothing is more important electorally than his defeat on November 5.

Ted Glick has been a progressive activist, organizer and writer since 1968. He is the author of the recently published books, Burglar for Peace and 21st Century Revolution. More info can be found at https://tedglick.com. 

Third Parties and the November Election

Future Hope

So what’s the state of the horse race for the Presidency? I’ve done a little research, and here’s what I’ve come up with.

I looked at the polling results for the first three weeks of May at the Real Clear Politics website by pollsters who gave the option of not just Biden and Trump but Kennedy, West and Stein. There are six polls which did this: Fox, The Economist, I&I/TIPP, USA Today, ABC and NPR. When you count up and average the numbers, what you get is Trump and Biden each at about 41%, Kennedy at 8%, West at 1.5% and Stein at 1%.

Of course, under the USA’s severely antiquated political system, who wins the popular vote doesn’t determine the winner; it’s the Electoral College. But these polling numbers do give a pretty decent sense of the state of play 5 ½ months before the big November 5th election. Here’s how I’d summarize it:

-It’s very much a toss-up between Trump and Biden, which is marginally better for Biden than it was a couple of months ago before his State of the Union speech.

-Kennedy’s campaign is not resonating with the vast majority of voters. Prior to this month’s polling results, he was sometimes at 12% or even higher.

-As has been true for every Green Party Presidential candidate since Ralph Nader’s campaign in 2000, it is likely to get no more than 1% of the vote (their 2020 candidate, Howie Hawkins, got 1/3 of a percent). And it looks similar for West.

If you’re a Stein or West supporter, these are not happy results. On the other hand, they are certainly the only ones who are consistently Left in their positions on issues. They are both strong on the need for an immediate and permanent ceasefire in Gaza, an end to US military support for this genocidal war, etc. If you are progressive and believe that taking the right position on that issue and on other issues is the sole criterion used in deciding whom to vote for, one of them is your candidate.

As far as Kennedy, I would not be surprised if he ends up getting no more than 4-5% of the vote, possibly less. His support comes from both progressives and conservatives. I hope that many of those on the Left who are supporting him right now end up not voting for him and that all of those on the Right who support him continue their support all the way to the voting booth since it would take votes away from Trump.

It’s a fact that, historically, third party Presidential candidates who have no chance of winning usually see their support drop precipitously as election day nears and the handwriting is on the wall. A prime example is Nader in 2000, who I supported, so I know that three days before the election the latest polls had him at 5% of the vote. But on election day he ended up getting just 2.7%.

There is a way Stein or West could try to increase their voting percentages. They could start saying publicly that they appreciate the great danger Trump represents and, accordingly, despite their deep problems with Joe Biden, their campaigns will take a different approach toward battleground states compared to other states. They could say that they will not campaign in states like Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Arizona, Nevada, Georgia or North Carolina and that in those states they encourage their supporters to let their conscience be their guide as far as who they vote for. They would then campaign solely in the other states, which is a big majority of them, where there’s a near certainty based on past election results that either Trump or Biden will win—states like California, New York, most deep South, Rocky Mountain and New England states.

This is not a new idea. I was one of the Green Party members who in 2004-5 began to put it forward as an approach that took into account the 18th century, US electoral college reality of who wins elections and the desirability of organizing under Democratic rule as we build toward an independent progressive movement to eventually win political power. Twenty years later, after five very weak showings in the GP’s Presidential vote totals, national GP leaders have consciously rejected this tactic, seeing it as an unprincipled and opportunistic capitulation to the two-party duopoly.

I wish Cornell West would take an approach different than the GP. Maybe his taking the lead on this question would have an impact on the GP finally changing their tactics to adjust to the unjust, US electoral college, non-proportional way of electing Presidents.

Ted Glick has been a progressive activist, organizer and writer since 1968. He is the author of the recently published books, Burglar for Peace and 21st Century Revolution. More info can be found at https://tedglick.com.