Learn from This

This is to the young Americans who have rallied in such numbers – and with such passion – to the banner of Bernie Sanders. 

First, I’ve been with you all along - and I still am.  In the wake of the April 26 primaries, which nearly closed the door on winning the nomination - I've just sent Bernie another contribution.   

And you would have been with me four decades ago, when the Establishment was Richard Nixon, on the Republican side, and Lyndon Johnson, on the Democratic side.  And when that Establishment supported the Vietnam War.

As we sang in those days, “Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.”

I’m writing this now because we have been fighting an uphill battle, and it now seems certain we will not win.   That doesn’t mean we should give up.  We should re-double our efforts. 

But if we don’t make it – if Bernie doesn’t overcome staggering odds and win the Democratic nomination and the White House – it’s important that younger American learn from this experience.

And the lesson to be learned is this:  Don’t give in.  Don’t lose heart.  And above all, don’t join the Establishment.

No doubt, in the course of this campaign, you’ve encountered people my age – or your parents’ age – whose argument is along these lines:  “I’d love to vote for Bernie, but I’m afraid he can’t win.  So I’m voting for Hillary.”

It’s a fool’s argument, but for several generations, millions of Americans have bought it.  And as long as people continue to buy it, nothing much will change.

The problem with this argument is that it’s based on a fundamental misreading of History.  We don’t do a very good job of teaching History in this country – as you no doubt know.  That’s why, whenever the media wants some academic type to comment on elections, they reach out to a Political Science type.

But Political Science is all about winning this election, which – ultimately – comes down to playing by today’s rules.  History deals with longer, slower processes, of changing the rules - which starts with changing hearts and minds.

Not winning elections.

If you look back at History, it usually worked that way.  Gandhi didn’t free India by referendum.  Martin Luther King, Jr., never ran for office.  Nelson Mandela did run, but his revolution had succeeded before his candidacy became possible.

Revolution is a political process, but it doesn't usually begin as an electoral process.

The Party of Lincoln – the Republican Party – started as a third party with no shot at winning the White House.  That was in 1854.  Six years later, they put Abe Lincoln in the White House, and three years later, he signed the Emancipation Proclamation.

But the Republican Party's founders took a yuge risk when they quit the two major parties - the Whigs and the Democrats - to start a third party opposed to slavery.

And a third party is exactly what we need right now.

Let's go back to the words we’ve all heard this year:  “I’d love to vote for Bernie, but I’m afraid he can’t win.  So I’m voting for Hillary.”

Those words are a trap.  The argument makes sense in the short run.  Conventional candidates always have a better chance of winning this year.

But the problem is, it’s always “this year”. 

And we never get to someday.

So this is how it plays out.  Assume Hillary is the nominee.  For the past few months, she’s been saying a lot of the same things Bernie is saying.  But she hasn’t always said these things.  She’s changed her position on almost every issue she’s running on, because – precisely because – she’s a “pragmatist”.

But let's say she wins the Democratic nomination.  As a conventional politician – a pragmatist – she’ll spend a month or so making nice with Bernie’s supporters, and saying the things we want to hear, to “unify the party”. 

But by September, she’ll be running toward the middle - to get the "undecided" voters.

And, if she wins, and becomes the first woman president in American history, she’ll immediately start running to become the first two-term woman president.

She won’t take big risks.  She won’t do the things she’s talking about now.

She'll run for re-election.

She's a pragmatist, remember?

She’ll promise, quietly, to do all the big things in her second term.

The only problem is, no one – at least, no one not named Teddy Roosevelt – has ever accomplished big things in his second term.

That’s History, too.  You can check.

If Hillary wins the nomination, a lot of us will – reluctantly – decide to support her.  And some younger voters will start thinking of themselves as Democrats.

And that’s where the trap springs shut. 

The two-party system has survived, all this time, on the notion of “the lesser of two evils”.

You start off wanting change, and hoping to force one of the major parties to change.  And then, when it doesn’t, you either drop out - or you sign on with that major party.

You work to change it from within.

Except that it doesn't change.

You do.

Slowly, inexorably, you become one of those people who say things like, “I’d love to vote for Bernie, but I’m afraid he can’t win.  So I’m voting for Hillary.”

Except the names change, of course.  And when you say it, it’s four decades later.

And not much has changed.

So here's what I'm saying.  Don’t change.

Fight hard, now, for Bernie.  But if we don’t win this time, don’t join the Establishment.

That hasn't worked for my generation, or your parents' generation.  It won't work for you.

Instead, keep fighting – even if, like Abraham Lincoln – you have to start a third party.  Or join one.

There's only one way out of the "lesser of two evils" trap.  And that's to refuse to play.

And to build something that's not evil.