Secondly, our political landscape is mercilessly two-party. It will take eons before instant-runoff voting or similar alternatives will make third parties viable in any way. True, the party bosses are shamelessly conservative in all respects, and have erected many obstacles to true structural reform. But when I think of the need to radically change irrelevant and oppressive institutions, my mind immediately goes to LBJ – not LBJ the president, mind you, but LBJ the senator. This was a man who – in an era of apartheid, and in a governmental system that slavishly adhered to the rule of seniority – got Southern barons to vote on civil rights bills, (temporarily) dismantled the committee seniority system that always kept the Southern committee heads in power, and even got lots of liberals to head Senatorial committees. It takes phenomenal leadership (and a little bit of conniving), but no institution is immune to subtle minds like his.

Finally, I can think of one other reason why an ‘infiltrated’ Democratic Party would be the superior choice. Let’s assume the best happens: worker solidarity pulses through the air, “socialism” loses its pejorative sting (at least for the kinds of people we need), and left-wingers are starting to gain serious political power. Undoubtedly there will be another “Red Scare” in some form or another. The elite will not passively sit by. Given our history, and given their control over information, we can bet that their retaliation will be ruthless. Worker solidarity may counter the elite’s means of control so the cause stays galvanized, but the witch hunts will certainly claim the careers of many sympathetic people in power – people whose institutional power is vital for structural reform. But if those public figures are members of a mainstream majority party, a great deal might be spared from the full blow of the assault. Enough might remain to champion (and/or politically strongarm) the workers’ cause sufficiently enough to make the PERMANENT STRUCTURAL CHANGES that are necessary.

Needless to say, establishing a socialist wing of the Democratic Party would not be easy. It would present its own challenges. The first and foremost would be to unite the disparate elements of the labor movement, in conjunction with the cooperative movement, under one banner. Both (especially the latter) are very embittered towards the Democrats’ love affair with neoliberalism; it would take a lot of clever strategy to get them all aboard the same vessel. Hammering into the collective head of the Left that unity (let alone being in bed with the Democrats!) is the only possible means towards victory would be difficult, but an equally important thing to be wary of would be maintaining our ideals. It would be too easy to sacrifice core principles for political gain. Politics, of course, demands a certain moral flexibility, but a careful balance between idealism and pragmatism must be paramount.

The points you made about this new, democratic mass-awakening made me instinctively think of praxis: what we can do NOW to build the foundations for a grand coalition that will weather – and capitalize upon – the storm when it comes.

Specifically, do you envision a separate socialist party to be the political vanguard for Economic Democracy? Or perhaps people of a left-wing persuasion would infiltrate the Democratic Party like the fundamentalists did with the GOP in the 1970′s and 80′s? Or would political parties even be relevant if and when the elite’s means of control falter before the tide of the newly-conscious masses?