FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

The Revolution Betrayed: Why Sandernistas Have a Right to be Angry

On Thursday morning, Democratic presidential hopeful Bernie Sanders stood in front of reporters outside of the White House, just coming from a meeting with President Obama and pledged his support to Hillary Clinton, the party’s presumptive nominee.

Sander said in the coming weeks he looked forward to talking to Clinton and “”to see how we can work together to defeat Donald Trump and to create a government which represents all of us and not just the 1 percent.”

Can Sanders work with Clinton and not betray the political revolution he said he was creating?

No.

By moving his allegiance to the very political machine he spoke out against, Sanders is aligning with a pro-military interventionist who opposes the minimum wage hike the working class needs. He is aligning with a politician who has said she won’t take up the fight ensure every American not only has healthcare but healthcare they can actually afford to use.

Sanders is resigning himself to incremental change that will continue to leave behind the most vulnerable Americans for the next four to eight years and tell his revolutionary followers that they will simply have to wait it out.

Does Sanders have another option?

Yes.

Green Party candidate Jill Stein has continuously reached out to Sanders to find a way to continue the revolution together. Stein’s campaign aligns almost perfectly with the message Sanders campaigned on. While she may not have the market force to win the election, and together they would still likely fall short, they can use their momentum, their revolutionary attitude to force a real change in American politics.

By standing by the side of Clinton, Sanders is selling out his supporters who came into the Democratic Party to fight for change, not to stick around to watch the status quo tell them their demands are not important and to shut up and fall in line.

Sanders seems to think he can make the most difference by endorsing Clinton and using the clout he built up during his momentous run for president to influence the future of the Democratic Party. There is little evidence this will happen, however, seeing as how Clinton herself told MSNBC in April that she is winning because of her policies, not those of Sanders.

“I’ve got 10.4 million votes. I have 2.7 million more folks, real people, showing up to cast their vote, to express their opinion than Senator Sanders. I have a bigger lead in pledged delegates than Senator Obama when I ran against him in 2008 ever had over me. I am winning. And I’m winning because of what I stand for and what I’ve done and what I stand for,” Clinton said.

She believes the people have spoken, and by people, she means those who supported her. She will give little attention to those who did not pledge their support because she believes they do not matter. Her three-million-vote lead tells her she needs to listen to those who voted her in, and there is little reason to believe she will consider doing otherwise.

Furthermore, when asked by MSNBC if she would concede conditions to Sanders for his endorsement she said that is now how it works.

“Let’s look at what happened in 2008, because that’s the closest example. Then-Senator Obama and I ran a really hard race. It was so much closer than the race right now between me and Senator Sanders. We had pretty much the same amount of popular votes. By some measures, I have slightly more popular votes. He has slightly more pledged delegates.

“We got to the end in June and I did not put down conditions. I didn’t say, ‘you know what, if Senator Obama does x, y and z, maybe I’ll support him. I said, ‘I am supporting Senator Obama, because no matter what our differences might be, they pale in comparison to the differences between us and the Republicans.’ That’s what I did.”

Clinton does not want to give Sanders, or his supporters a voice going forward. She has a policy platform and she believes because she won on that platform, that is what the people want.

Now, by signing on to support Clinton, and doing without laying down any sort of ground rules, something he even said he would do when he visited The Young Turks, he is rolling over and conceding his revolution to the Democratic Party machine.

His supporters should rightfully feel betrayed.

More articles by:

Dan Arel is a political writer and social activist. He is the author of Parenting Without God and the upcoming book, The Secular Activist.

September 18, 2018
Conn Hallinan
Britain: the Anti-Semitism Debate
Tamara Pearson
Why Mexico’s Next President is No Friend of Migrants
Richard Moser
Both the Commune and Revolution
Nick Pemberton
Serena 15, Tennis Love
Binoy Kampmark
Inconvenient Realities: Climate Change and the South Pacific
Martin Billheimer
La Grand’Route: Waiting for the Bus
John Kendall Hawkins
Seymour Hersh: a Life of Adversarial Democracy at Work
Faisal Khan
Is Israel a Democracy?
John Feffer
The GOP Wants Trumpism…Without Trump
Kim Ives
The Roots of Haiti’s Movement for PetroCaribe Transparency
Dave Lindorff
We Already Have a Fake Billionaire President; Why Would We want a Real One Running in 2020?
Gerry Brown
Is China Springing Debt Traps or Throwing a Lifeline to Countries in Distress?
Pete Tucker
The Washington Post Really Wants to Stop Ben Jealous
Dean Baker
Getting It Wrong Again: Consumer Spending and the Great Recession
September 17, 2018
Melvin Goodman
What is to be Done?
Rob Urie
American Fascism
Patrick Cockburn
The Adults in the White House Trying to Save the US From Trump Are Just as Dangerous as He Is
Jeffrey St. Clair - Alexander Cockburn
The Long Fall of Bob Woodward: From Nixon’s Nemesis to Cheney’s Savior
Mairead Maguire
Demonization of Russia in a New Cold War Era
Dean Baker
The Bank Bailout of 2008 was Unnecessary
Wim Laven
Hurricane Trump, Season 2
Yves Engler
Smearing Dimitri Lascaris
Ron Jacobs
From ROTC to Revolution and Beyond
Clark T. Scott
The Cannibals of Horsepower
Binoy Kampmark
A Traditional Right: Jimmie Åkesson and the Sweden Democrats
Laura Flanders
History Markers
Weekend Edition
September 14, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Carl Boggs
Obama’s Imperial Presidency
Joshua Frank
From CO2 to Methane, Trump’s Hurricane of Destruction
Jeffrey St. Clair
Maria’s Missing Dead
Andrew Levine
A Bulwark Against the Idiocy of Conservatives Like Brett Kavanaugh
T.J. Coles
Neil deGrasse Tyson: A Celebrity Salesman for the Military-Industrial-Complex
Jeff Ballinger
Nike and Colin Kaepernick: Fronting the Bigots’ Team
David Rosen
Why Stop at Roe? How “Settled Law” Can be Overturned
Gary Olson
Pope Francis and the Battle Over Cultural Terrain
Nick Pemberton
Donald The Victim: A Product of Post-9/11 America
Ramzy Baroud
The Veiled Danger of the ‘Dead’ Oslo Accords
Kevin Martin
U.S. Support for the Bombing of Yemen to Continue
Robert Fisk
A Murder in Aleppo
Robert Hunziker
The Elite World Order in Jitters
Ben Dangl
After 9/11: The Staggering Economic and Human Cost of the War on Terror
Charles Pierson
Invade The Hague! Bolton vs. the ICC
Robert Fantina
Trump and Palestine
Daniel Warner
Hubris on and Off the Court
John Kendall Hawkins
Boning Up on Eternal Recurrence, Kubrick-style: “2001,” Revisited
Haydar Khan
Set Theory of the Left
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail