Latest / Breaking Points with Krystal and Saagar / 7/27/26: Kshama Sawant: My Independent Socialist Campaign Will Defeat Adam Smith!

Transcript

7/27/26: Kshama Sawant: My Independent Socialist Campaign Will Defeat Adam Smith! · Breaking Points with Krystal and Saagar

0:00
Speaker 1: Hey guys, Saga and Crystal here.
0:01
Speaker 2: Independent media just played a truly massive role in this election,
0:05
Speaker 2: and we are so excited about what that means for
0:07
Speaker 2: the future of this show.
0:08
Speaker 1: This is the only place where you can find honest
0:10
Speaker 1: perspectives from the left and the right that simply does
0:13
Speaker 1: not exist anywhere else.
0:14
Speaker 2: So if that is something that's important to you, please
0:17
Speaker 2: go to Breakingpoints dot com. Become a member today and
0:19
Speaker 2: you'll get access to our full shows, unedited, ad free,
0:22
Speaker 2: and all put together for you every morning in your inbox.
0:25
Speaker 1: We need your help to build the future of independent
0:27
Speaker 1: news media and we hope to see you at Breakingpoints
0:29
Speaker 1: dot com.
0:33
Speaker 2: So last week I interviewed Representative Adam Smith, Democrat, ranking
0:37
Speaker 2: member of the House Armed Services Committee, and so this
0:39
Speaker 2: week we thought it'd be a good idea to interview
0:41
Speaker 2: one of his primary opponents, and she joins us now.
0:44
Speaker 2: Kashamasawan is an independent socialist running in the Jungle primary
0:48
Speaker 2: against Representative Adam Smith. Smith. Welcome to the show.
0:52
Speaker 3: Thank you so much for having me.
0:53
Speaker 2: Yeah, of course, and so in just a second, I
0:55
Speaker 2: love for you to give people a little bit of
0:56
Speaker 2: your background, what you're able to accomplish on the Seattle
1:00
Speaker 2: City Council. But first I wanted to give you a
1:02
Speaker 2: chance to react to some of that interview with Representative
1:04
Speaker 2: Adam Smith. Let's go ahead and take a look. This
1:07
Speaker 2: is when I was asking him if he had changed
1:09
Speaker 2: any of his views with regard to Israel, specifically because
1:12
Speaker 2: he's taken some interesting votes recently. Jake Sullivan, who just
1:15
Speaker 2: came out and said that he regrets the Biden policy
1:19
Speaker 2: of the Bear hug. He thinks they should have done
1:21
Speaker 2: more to restrain Israel. And I'm wondering if you have
1:24
Speaker 2: any regrets because now you're voting in a somewhat different way,
1:27
Speaker 2: you know, both with the NDAA shift in position, with
1:30
Speaker 2: the massive amendment saying hey, we should blockade. I want
1:33
Speaker 2: to send a message to NETANYAHUU. At the peak of
1:36
Speaker 2: the gaza onslaught, you had a complete siege, You had
1:41
Speaker 2: entire neighborhoods that were leveled. They created the largest population
1:45
Speaker 2: of child amputees. Do you have any regrets about your
1:48
Speaker 2: votes during that time period.
1:49
Speaker 4: I don't because everyone forgets about October seventh. Everyone forgets
1:54
Speaker 4: about what Hamas and Hesbald and Ron have done, and
1:57
Speaker 4: their desire is to wipe out the state of Israel
2:01
Speaker 4: and all the Jews living there. Is that not I mean,
2:05
Speaker 4: that's in Hamas's charter, and Hamas is still extent. They're
2:08
Speaker 4: still doing that. I don't like the way Israel decided
2:11
Speaker 4: to defend themselves, but the solution being proposed is and
2:16
Speaker 4: this is the consequence of what you're saying is sorry.
2:20
Speaker 4: You know, we had this idea back in nineteen forty eight.
2:22
Speaker 4: We were going to give you a state and that
2:24
Speaker 4: way you could protect yourselfe. And so all these tacks
2:26
Speaker 4: didn't work out.
2:27
Speaker 2: So just some people know the way that things work
2:30
Speaker 2: in Washington. It's kind of similar to California. Everybody, regardless
2:33
Speaker 2: of their political prime party, runs in this jungle primary
2:36
Speaker 2: and then the top two move on to the general
2:38
Speaker 2: election in the fall. I'm curious, Kashama, what did you
2:41
Speaker 2: think of that response and what did you think what
2:43
Speaker 2: did you take from that interview in general from Representative Smith.
2:46
Speaker 3: Bushe all The fact that he reached out to you,
2:48
Speaker 3: Cristill to do the interview itself to me as an
2:50
Speaker 3: indication of his nervousness because he's a very very conservative Democrat.
2:55
Speaker 3: He's a long standing warmongering Democrat. Let's be clear. He's
2:58
Speaker 3: been in Congress nine years, which is longer than many
3:01
Speaker 3: of my campaigns volunteers have been alive. And he is
3:04
Speaker 3: one of the five remaining House Democrats who voted for
3:08
Speaker 3: the war on Iraq, and he has the blood of
3:10
Speaker 3: a million Iraq He's on his hands. He's voted for
3:13
Speaker 3: tens of billions of dollars with Geno Saide in Gaza,
3:15
Speaker 3: and it's really telling that when you asked him, do
3:18
Speaker 3: you have any regrets, he says he has no regrets,
3:21
Speaker 3: and throughout the show he you know, he was on
3:24
Speaker 3: your show for forty five minutes, he absolutely erased the
3:28
Speaker 3: Palestinian people, absolutely erased them. He refused to acknowledge the
3:33
Speaker 3: apartheid state that they're living in. And any of the
3:38
Speaker 3: moves he's made right now to pivot away from or
3:41
Speaker 3: seemingly to pivot away from, his blood drenched record is
3:46
Speaker 3: in my view, entirely because of the pressure he's feeling
3:49
Speaker 3: from our campaign. I mean, obviously he's the Democratic Party
3:53
Speaker 3: as a whole, the establishment as a whole is feeling
3:55
Speaker 3: real pressure from the recent victories against the Slishment Democrats
4:00
Speaker 3: in New York City and Colorado State. But as far
4:03
Speaker 3: as Adam Smith personally is concerned. You know, he is
4:06
Speaker 3: an apac darling. He's bankrolled by the billionaires who profit
4:11
Speaker 3: from corporations warmongering war profit here in corporations like Polunteer
4:15
Speaker 3: and Lockheed Martin all of that, So you know he
4:18
Speaker 3: is He's very much an entrenched warmongering democrat. He's a
4:21
Speaker 3: general among the warmongers, and any pivot he's making is
4:25
Speaker 3: precisely because he's actually specifically being threatened by our campaign.
4:30
Speaker 3: And that is why he literally voted no on his
4:34
Speaker 3: own bill to give Trump a trillion dollars for what
4:37
Speaker 3: I mean, who votes against your own bill when it's
4:40
Speaker 3: only when you're nervous about your opponent. And I don't
4:43
Speaker 3: know if you heard right now, just a few days
4:45
Speaker 3: ago he said, oh, I think we need fifteen dollars
4:48
Speaker 3: an hour federal minimum wage. I mean, it's like newsflash
4:52
Speaker 3: for you, dude. We won fifteen dollars an hour in
4:54
Speaker 3: Seattle in twenty fourteen, and that Seattle has spread, that
4:59
Speaker 3: fifteen dollars has spread to many cities and states because
5:02
Speaker 3: working people organize around it. And these guys are so
5:05
Speaker 3: behind the federal minimum wages seven dollars twenty five cents
5:08
Speaker 3: an hour still.
5:10
Speaker 5: And so can you set the stage a little bit,
5:12
Speaker 5: tell people who aren't familiar with your career about your
5:16
Speaker 5: kind of first twenty thirteen run and how it is
5:19
Speaker 5: that you got to where you are now.
5:21
Speaker 3: Yeah, I ran as an independent socialist in twenty thirteen.
5:25
Speaker 3: That was our first campaign. And I say hour and
5:28
Speaker 3: we because it wasn't just me. It was a whole
5:30
Speaker 3: group of revolutionary socialists who ran that campaign together. And
5:34
Speaker 3: we ran on our flagship demand of fifteen dollars an hour,
5:38
Speaker 3: and also on taxing the rich corporations like Amazon, Starbucks, Steamobili.
5:42
Speaker 3: You know, these are all corporations that are headquartered in Seattle,
5:45
Speaker 3: and also for renters rights and rent control. And at
5:48
Speaker 3: that time I was widely mocked for calling for fifteen
5:52
Speaker 3: dollars an hour. Nobody thought it was going to happen.
5:54
Speaker 3: All the corporate media said it was utopian. But it
5:58
Speaker 3: was precisely because it was an independent socialist campaign, and
6:02
Speaker 3: because we were running not on personality or personal narrative
6:05
Speaker 3: or I wasn't running to make my own personal career.
6:08
Speaker 3: We were running very clearly on working class demands that
6:11
Speaker 3: the campaign actually won, even though we were the absolute underdog.
6:15
Speaker 3: It was a long shot. We still won. And then
6:17
Speaker 3: after I took office in January twenty fourteen, two of
6:21
Speaker 3: the most powerful Democrats on the city Council came to
6:24
Speaker 3: my office, sat me down and said that it's all
6:27
Speaker 3: well and good that you rabble rouse your way into
6:30
Speaker 3: the city council, but we are here to tell you
6:32
Speaker 3: that city Hall runs on our terms and you're not
6:34
Speaker 3: going to win any minimum wage, let alone fifteen. And
6:37
Speaker 3: less than six months later, we had won fifteen dollars
6:40
Speaker 3: an hour. We made Seattle the first major city to
6:42
Speaker 3: win fifteen. And the way we did it was not
6:45
Speaker 3: by me sweet talking other Democrats or morally persuading them,
6:49
Speaker 3: but by using my office to build mass movements. And
6:53
Speaker 3: that's the basis on which we won the Amazon tax
6:56
Speaker 3: and rentors right, and that's the same principle we're using
6:59
Speaker 3: in this congresstional campaign as well to end all military
7:02
Speaker 3: to Israel and to win free healthcare.
7:04
Speaker 5: And so after that victory, you then had the twenty
7:06
Speaker 5: fifteen and twenty sixteen Bernie Sanders campaign, which led to
7:10
Speaker 5: this kind of influx in membership for Democratic Socialists of America.
7:14
Speaker 5: And if we can put up f four.
7:16
Speaker 3: People can see the.
7:17
Speaker 5: Chart here, you know, it ticks down a little bit
7:19
Speaker 5: and then boom, you see the campaign of New York
7:23
Speaker 5: Mayor's Armandani, and you see DSA membership surging again. He
7:29
Speaker 5: effectively challenged three incumbent Democrats in New York City, knocked
7:36
Speaker 5: two incumbent Democrats out, knocked out the kind of head
7:39
Speaker 5: of the Brooklyn Party who was backed by the outgoing incumbent.
7:43
Speaker 5: Then the DSA wins out in Denver, Colorado. They have
7:47
Speaker 5: a couple campaigns coming in Michigan as well, Detroit in particular.
7:52
Speaker 5: But talk to us a little bit about what your
7:55
Speaker 5: view is of DSA, which has become the kind of
7:58
Speaker 5: big story I've seen. You make an argument that their
8:01
Speaker 5: strategy overall is flawed. How do you square how you
8:07
Speaker 5: understand the DSA with how they've done over the last
8:11
Speaker 5: several months and years.
8:13
Speaker 3: I think it's really really important what's happening. I agree
8:16
Speaker 3: with you. These are historic defeats of entrenched Democrats like
8:21
Speaker 3: Adriano Spa and Guyana de Guet, you know, in New
8:24
Speaker 3: York City and Colorado respectively. I mean, these were seemingly
8:28
Speaker 3: invincible Democrats incumbents and they were defeated, and it is
8:32
Speaker 3: a decisive repudiation of the Zionist agenda, of the pro
8:37
Speaker 3: billionaire agenda that the democratic establishment subscribes to. And you know,
8:42
Speaker 3: it is really it's really crucial because it is in
8:44
Speaker 3: the context of the Democratic and Republican parties in my view,
8:47
Speaker 3: and this is part of the difference of strategy and
8:50
Speaker 3: also analysis that I have from some of the DSA leadership,
8:55
Speaker 3: which is that in my view, the Democratic and Republican
8:58
Speaker 3: parties both are the together are the two most powerful
9:02
Speaker 3: parties of global capitalism. But the recent primary victories of
9:08
Speaker 3: the democratic socials of America shows that, first of all,
9:12
Speaker 3: that tens of millions of working class people in the
9:15
Speaker 3: United States are angry. They are really angry at the
9:18
Speaker 3: status quo. They're angry about the genocide in Gaza, about
9:21
Speaker 3: the Forever Wars. And many of the people who voted
9:23
Speaker 3: for Trump are also angry because you know, remember Trump
9:25
Speaker 3: ran on the agenda ending the wars, and now he's
9:28
Speaker 3: become the warmonger in chief, and so there is huge
9:32
Speaker 3: anger in society. And so it's not a coincidence that
9:34
Speaker 3: you have Trump having very low approval ratings, but so
9:38
Speaker 3: do the Democratic and Republican parties. And in this context,
9:42
Speaker 3: the opposition to the establishment's agenda is winning victories, and
9:46
Speaker 3: so it is. It is a confirmation of the dramatic
9:50
Speaker 3: shift in consciousness. I think all of that needs to
9:54
Speaker 3: then be translated into actual outcomes. And this is where,
9:57
Speaker 3: you know, just to explain my meta trick of success
10:01
Speaker 3: is not whether I win the election. Obviously, I have
10:03
Speaker 3: won four elections, and it was only because I won
10:06
Speaker 3: my first election first of all, that'd we won fifteen
10:09
Speaker 3: dollars an hour because at that time the overwhelming majority
10:11
Speaker 3: of the labor leadership was opposed to fifteen. They were
10:14
Speaker 3: forced to get on board because of my election victory
10:17
Speaker 3: and because the majority of union members and non unionized
10:20
Speaker 3: workers were excited about fifteen and wanted to wanted to
10:24
Speaker 3: fight for it, and the labor leadership would have been
10:26
Speaker 3: exposed at that time if they didn't support it. So
10:29
Speaker 3: in that sense, you know, it is election victories are
10:31
Speaker 3: absolutely crucial. But in my view, election victories are not
10:34
Speaker 3: an end in themselves. It's a vehicle. Winning an office,
10:38
Speaker 3: in my view, is a vehicle to build mass movements.
10:41
Speaker 3: And so the concrete questions will be the similar questions
10:46
Speaker 3: that were raised when AOC was first elected and the squad,
10:48
Speaker 3: original Squad members were elected, what will you do with
10:52
Speaker 3: that elected office? And so concretely, the immediate question that
10:57
Speaker 3: will be faced, especially, I mean if there were to
11:00
Speaker 3: win the House, is will you vote for Hakim Jeffries
11:04
Speaker 3: or some other generocidal Democrat as the Speaker of the House.
11:08
Speaker 3: And that concrete question will be will translate into the
11:13
Speaker 3: idea there will be pitch battle inside the Democratic Party
11:17
Speaker 3: or there won't be and the new one new Congress
11:22
Speaker 3: members will be schooled into accepting And already we have
11:24
Speaker 3: seen Mamdani and AOC endors hackem Jeffrey. So that's the
11:27
Speaker 3: kind of concrete question I'm talking about. And I'm running
11:30
Speaker 3: as an independent, of course, and I'm happy to if elected,
11:33
Speaker 3: I would be happy to work with the Democrats who
11:36
Speaker 3: want to fight alongside me for the working class people.
11:38
Speaker 3: But I'm just saying that the questions will be post concretely,
11:42
Speaker 3: like that question about hackem Jeffries.
11:44
Speaker 2: So how do you think that Zorin is doing? Because
11:46
Speaker 2: you know, just for myself, I see his victory in
11:48
Speaker 2: the New York City mayoral primary against the Cuomo machine,
11:51
Speaker 2: and with all of the establishment Democrats either actively endorsing Cuomo,
11:55
Speaker 2: trying to undermine him, et cetera. I see that as
11:57
Speaker 2: one of the most consequential developments for the broad left
12:02
Speaker 2: in my lifetime, and specifically for socialists in my lifetime.
12:05
Speaker 2: I think we see that with the way he was
12:06
Speaker 2: able to use his political capital to get some of
12:09
Speaker 2: his allies elected both at the federal and at the
12:11
Speaker 2: state level. And then to your question of okay, well,
12:13
Speaker 2: is he delivering the goods? You know, in terms of
12:15
Speaker 2: his core Canepan promises, he really is. The rent is
12:18
Speaker 2: being frozen, the buses are getting faster. He was able
12:21
Speaker 2: to cut a deal in order to expand free childcare,
12:26
Speaker 2: so he's working on the grocery store. So he has
12:29
Speaker 2: been delivering in terms of what his campaign promises are.
12:32
Speaker 2: If we could put F two up on the screen.
12:34
Speaker 2: I know you've been very critical of him in the past,
12:35
Speaker 2: and I wonder if you still feel this way. You
12:37
Speaker 2: said previously you thought he was caving to the Democratic
12:40
Speaker 2: Party's pro billionaire agenda, agenda. You insinuated he was a sellout.
12:45
Speaker 2: You said that his approach was a dead end. But
12:48
Speaker 2: it looks to me like his approach is working. So
12:51
Speaker 2: do you still feel that he is effectively a sellout
12:55
Speaker 2: who is given cover to billionaires?
12:58
Speaker 3: I think if you look at what is what what
13:01
Speaker 3: has happened, you know, I agree with you the rent
13:03
Speaker 3: frees and all of them. And as I've said in
13:04
Speaker 3: previous shows, for me as a reblutionary socialist, I mean
13:09
Speaker 3: I may have differences on various questions of strategy, but
13:12
Speaker 3: as far as working class victories are concerned, I support
13:16
Speaker 3: every single victory, and for me that is a very
13:20
Speaker 3: you know, I insist on a non sectarian approach, meaning
13:23
Speaker 3: that I might have critique, but having a critique of
13:26
Speaker 3: other leaders on the left, in my view, is not sectarianism.
13:29
Speaker 3: Sectarianism is when you refuse to prioritize the interests of
13:32
Speaker 3: the working class in order to prioritize you know, your whatever,
13:36
Speaker 3: your petty whatever differences or petty quibbles and stuff like that.
13:43
Speaker 3: And so it is the rent freees important for the
13:47
Speaker 3: working class, that is, whose lives are going to be
13:49
Speaker 3: made better by that. Yes. Absolutely. The question though in
13:53
Speaker 3: my view is everything that's else that's missing? Uh? And
13:57
Speaker 3: so it does quite bring up question of strategy, which
14:01
Speaker 3: is how much can you win and for how long
14:03
Speaker 3: can you win based on the approach of trying to
14:06
Speaker 3: sweep top the billionaire class, trying to make deals, as
14:09
Speaker 3: you said, Crystal, cutting a deal. I don't subscribe to
14:12
Speaker 3: the approach of cutting deals. I subscribe to the approach
14:15
Speaker 3: of build, using elected office to build mass movements. So
14:18
Speaker 3: his campaign itself, and I've been very clear about this,
14:21
Speaker 3: his campaign itself was very much you know, the approach
14:25
Speaker 3: he used was very much something that I've used in
14:27
Speaker 3: my campaigns, which is to mobilize thousands of people into action,
14:31
Speaker 3: you know, literally having door knocking throughout the city and
14:33
Speaker 3: running on very concrete demands and being emphatic about repeating
14:38
Speaker 3: those demands everywhere you go in your some speeches. All
14:40
Speaker 3: of that is very very crucial. But then when you
14:43
Speaker 3: win elected office, what do you do with that office?
14:46
Speaker 3: That's different? Then, just to give you one very confid example,
14:49
Speaker 3: is Ventre is important. Yes, But if you look at
14:52
Speaker 3: the big picture of what's happening to housing right now,
14:56
Speaker 3: private equity earns about one in eight apartment units in
15:00
Speaker 3: the nation. And this is specifically, this very true in
15:05
Speaker 3: New York City. You're seeing Blackstone become the city's largest
15:09
Speaker 3: apartment owner, getting two hundred and twenty five million in
15:12
Speaker 3: taxpis all of this, you know, these are just examples
15:15
Speaker 3: I'm using just to make the larger point that the
15:18
Speaker 3: big picture that's missing when we only look at or
15:21
Speaker 3: reason when free is a win, Yes it's a win,
15:23
Speaker 3: but I'm talking about the big picture of capitalism in
15:26
Speaker 3: which everything is going downhill for working people, not to
15:30
Speaker 3: mention the climate catastrophe. And so the approach that's needed
15:34
Speaker 3: is going to be a fighting approach that I've used,
15:37
Speaker 3: which is actually mobilizing hundreds of thousands of people into action.
15:41
Speaker 2: And just to you know, I would if I could
15:44
Speaker 2: just on a Kashan, because I think this is kind
15:46
Speaker 2: of the core of, you know, the debate around your
15:49
Speaker 2: approach versus the approach of Zora and the DSA. You know,
15:53
Speaker 2: I must personally, we'll just say, skeptical of when he
15:56
Speaker 2: came in and said, you know what, I'm not going
15:57
Speaker 2: to endorse against the chem Jeffries, and some reporting came
16:00
Speaker 2: out that that was important to Kathy Hokel, and so
16:03
Speaker 2: I was initially I was kind of critical of that.
16:05
Speaker 2: I was skeptical of that, I was like, you know what,
16:07
Speaker 2: these people they're never going to work with you, They're
16:09
Speaker 2: going to be adversarial to you. What are you doing? Well,
16:12
Speaker 2: I think that I was wrong and he was right,
16:14
Speaker 2: because ultimately we have to deal with the reality that
16:17
Speaker 2: Kathy Hockel is governor of the state, Donald Trump is
16:19
Speaker 2: President of the United States. We would like it if
16:22
Speaker 2: that wasn't the case, but that is reality, and he
16:24
Speaker 2: was able to secure a very significant win for working
16:28
Speaker 2: class people through being able to work with Kathy Hokel. Now,
16:33
Speaker 2: when he, for example, went and met with Donald Trump,
16:36
Speaker 2: he literally called the man a fascist to his face.
16:39
Speaker 2: But he also has not had the you know, massive
16:41
Speaker 2: invasion of New York City that we saw, for example,
16:44
Speaker 2: in Minneapolis, which also has very important consequences for working
16:49
Speaker 2: people in New York City. So from my perspective, as
16:52
Speaker 2: someone who now is mayor of a city responsible for
16:55
Speaker 2: millions of people's lives and is trying to cut a
16:58
Speaker 2: balance between you know, a revolution tionary objective but also
17:01
Speaker 2: working inside a system as it exists, I think he's
17:04
Speaker 2: really struck that balance well of using leveraging the mass
17:08
Speaker 2: movement that he built and that DSA has but also
17:12
Speaker 2: being pragmatic and smart and getting wins for his agenda,
17:17
Speaker 2: so that we can prove that socialists aren't just down there,
17:19
Speaker 2: like you know, having a book club and screaming slogans,
17:22
Speaker 2: that they can actually be trusted with power and scene,
17:24
Speaker 2: they can actually deliver measurable concrete results for the people there.
17:29
Speaker 3: Well, as far as delivering concrete results, I mean just
17:32
Speaker 3: to say that we through through a totally different approach
17:36
Speaker 3: than Mamdani, we were able to win the We were
17:41
Speaker 3: able to make Seattle the first major city to win
17:43
Speaker 3: fifteen dollars an hour, and actually now Seattle has the
17:45
Speaker 3: nation's highest minimum wage of twenty one dollars thirty cents
17:48
Speaker 3: an hour. We won the Amazon tax, which is hundreds
17:51
Speaker 3: of millions of dollars every year, defeating Jeff Bezos in
17:54
Speaker 3: a city of around you know, less than eight hundred
17:57
Speaker 3: thousand people. And we won a whole whole renters' rights
18:01
Speaker 3: in such a way that the corporate landlords, by their
18:03
Speaker 3: own admission, simply could not win in the ten years
18:06
Speaker 3: that I was in office. And so as far as
18:09
Speaker 3: winning victories for the working classes concerned, I mean, these
18:11
Speaker 3: are massive, historic victories that came from one elected office on,
18:16
Speaker 3: you know, as an independent socialist with all the other
18:18
Speaker 3: people being Democrats. And you know, I, uh, with respect, yes,
18:24
Speaker 3: I'm kinda.
18:24
Speaker 2: Just yet, yes, with respect on that though, it doesn't
18:28
Speaker 2: seem that that model has been replicable. I don't take
18:30
Speaker 2: anything away from you in terms that we've talked before.
18:32
Speaker 2: We you know, interviewed you back in rising days, et cetera,
18:34
Speaker 2: and followed your your progress closely. I don't take anything
18:37
Speaker 2: away from you in terms of the victories you're part
18:39
Speaker 2: of securing. It doesn't seem that that model has been
18:42
Speaker 2: replicable though, And you know, one member of Congress, one
18:45
Speaker 2: mayor Wanning City council member is not going to be sufficient.
18:50
Speaker 2: Whereas with DSA, you know, they're running hundreds of candidates,
18:52
Speaker 2: they've secured a lot of victories, they've done it on
18:55
Speaker 2: the Democratic party line, and they're really winning the argument
18:59
Speaker 2: with the Democratic base, which now overwhelmingly supports the politics
19:03
Speaker 2: that you and I do, which to me is an
19:05
Speaker 2: extraordinary thing as well.
19:07
Speaker 3: Obviously the Democratic base supports it, but the Democratic base
19:10
Speaker 3: supports us too. I mean, I would not have won
19:12
Speaker 3: a single election had the majority of people who vote
19:15
Speaker 3: Democrats otherwise had also not voted for me as any
19:18
Speaker 3: independent socialist as far as the basis concerned, Yes, but
19:21
Speaker 3: that's not the question yere. The question is what strategy
19:24
Speaker 3: works as far as the political establishment and the billionaire
19:27
Speaker 3: class is concerned. And you say that Mandanian the DS
19:30
Speaker 3: leaders have been leveraging mass movements, and I don't agree
19:33
Speaker 3: with that. They haven't been leveraging mass movements. In fact,
19:35
Speaker 3: they've been doing the exact opposite. And just to give
19:37
Speaker 3: you a concrete example, as far as Katijocal is concerned,
19:40
Speaker 3: you know, Kathy hocals Back has been against the wall,
19:43
Speaker 3: had been and so far especially with the rising consciousness
19:47
Speaker 3: and be angered against the Democratic Party. So in my view,
19:50
Speaker 3: the job of socialists is not to help rehabilitate the
19:54
Speaker 3: political reputations of politicians who are widely exposed as salahu
20:00
Speaker 3: As our Zionists, as pro billionaire politicians. And I would
20:03
Speaker 3: certainly not have done what mamdan Ne did, which is
20:06
Speaker 3: endorsed Katy Hokul in the midst of the New York
20:09
Speaker 3: City nurses strike at the same moment that she was
20:13
Speaker 3: writing executive order after executive order helping it, helping the
20:17
Speaker 3: hospital bosses higher scared nurses in order to undermine the
20:21
Speaker 3: nurses strike. So in reality, it is our job to
20:25
Speaker 3: go much much farther because capitalism is the ruthless system.
20:28
Speaker 3: This is class warfare against us, and we have to
20:32
Speaker 3: fight against that and make sure that we are exposing
20:36
Speaker 3: the politicians even further. Not our job is not to
20:39
Speaker 3: forge a progressive alliance I mean, sorry, some sort of
20:42
Speaker 3: our private alliance with Hokul, similarly with Hakim Jeffries. We
20:46
Speaker 3: have to actually push back against that. And right now
20:49
Speaker 3: the establishment is feeling the heat and so at this
20:52
Speaker 3: moment we should not be helping them. That is the
20:54
Speaker 3: part I disagree with. We should not be helping them.
20:56
Speaker 3: We should be going all out. And you know why.
20:58
Speaker 3: And I want to port a political article here which
21:00
Speaker 3: is saying it from the establishment side, but it's making
21:03
Speaker 3: the same point that I am making, which is that
21:05
Speaker 3: the capitalist class, and they are representatives, they are extremely malleable.
21:09
Speaker 3: They will try and adapt to find some way of
21:13
Speaker 3: continuing to survive despite the waves of revolt that come
21:18
Speaker 3: in every era, and our job as revolutionaries is to
21:21
Speaker 3: push back against that. And you know, they say that
21:24
Speaker 3: every movement becomes the establishment at some point. A lot
21:27
Speaker 3: of the elected officials who are in office now were
21:29
Speaker 3: once part of the movement. This happens twenty thirty years.
21:32
Speaker 3: It's not about it's a feature of two party politics.
21:35
Speaker 3: So that's this guy from the democratic establishment recognizing that, yeah,
21:38
Speaker 3: we need to present a different presentation in order to
21:42
Speaker 3: quell the revolt, and so on and so forth. And
21:44
Speaker 3: I'll tell you one thing. You can maybe when rent
21:47
Speaker 3: freees with the approach of trying to sweep top the
21:49
Speaker 3: billionaire class and their representatives, but you're certainly not going
21:52
Speaker 3: to win the big ticket items that working people need,
21:55
Speaker 3: which is universal public healthcare, in actually dealing with the
21:59
Speaker 3: climate catash and all of that. If you look at
22:01
Speaker 3: the history, if you look at the history of how
22:03
Speaker 3: universal health care was one in nations like Canada and
22:07
Speaker 3: in Western Europe, it was absolutely because of the approach,
22:10
Speaker 3: the kind of approach that I'm using, and especially building
22:13
Speaker 3: new parties for the working class. Like for example, in Canada,
22:16
Speaker 3: the universal public healthcare happened only because of the launching
22:20
Speaker 3: of what was called the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation of the CCF,
22:23
Speaker 3: which was a new party of the working class, them
22:25
Speaker 3: winning victories in Saskatchewan and then building public health care
22:29
Speaker 3: in that province that becoming really popular, and the rest
22:32
Speaker 3: of Canada, working people in Canada clamoring for it, and
22:35
Speaker 3: then the Tories themselves becoming really i mean the rueling
22:38
Speaker 3: class parties becoming really nervous about that and introduting public
22:43
Speaker 3: healthcare nationally because they were so nervous about the CCF
22:45
Speaker 3: gating political power nationally. And the same thing can be
22:48
Speaker 3: said about nation after nation in Western Europe. Those big
22:52
Speaker 3: victories that really changed people's lives were one only on
22:56
Speaker 3: the basis of a militant fight back. And that's also
23:00
Speaker 3: true of the New Deal. The New Deal was not
23:01
Speaker 3: one because of somebody making deals with FDR or whatever,
23:04
Speaker 3: or FDR making deals with the capitalists. The New Deal
23:07
Speaker 3: was one because of the nineteen thirty four Minneapolis General
23:10
Speaker 3: Strike and the auto sit down worker strike in an
23:12
Speaker 3: actual revolutionary mood in the US society, which really put
23:17
Speaker 3: this care on the capitalist class, and they both were
23:20
Speaker 3: forced to concede. And so it's our job to rest
23:22
Speaker 3: those concessions and not help in rehabilitating the political reputations
23:26
Speaker 3: of the sell out politicians.
23:31
Speaker 5: I think that history is all accurate. I think the
23:33
Speaker 5: part that I'm confused about is why it wouldn't also
23:36
Speaker 5: apply to the strategy that DSA is undertaking. For instance,
23:40
Speaker 5: like if you compare their broad idea they're trying. They're
23:43
Speaker 5: a socialist organization that is going for long term socialist
23:50
Speaker 5: revolution in the very long term, but in the immediate
23:53
Speaker 5: term they're trying to reform the system and trying to
23:56
Speaker 5: reform the situation for working people by running candidates in elections.
24:01
Speaker 5: Your organization for Socialist Alternative, then I think Revolutionary Worker
24:06
Speaker 5: that you started in twenty twenty four long term vision
24:09
Speaker 5: of revolutionary socialism, short term vision of reform for working
24:14
Speaker 5: people using the electoral system they have now, you know,
24:19
Speaker 5: well over one hundred thousand members. I think you could
24:22
Speaker 5: let us know what yours is at now. But otherwise,
24:24
Speaker 5: what's the difference between the two things like I don't
24:27
Speaker 5: like you guys both want higher minimum wage, you want
24:29
Speaker 5: higher taxes on the super rich, you want protections for tenants,
24:33
Speaker 5: you want to go after the landlarc classic is what
24:36
Speaker 5: is the actual difference? It feels to me more like
24:39
Speaker 5: just kind of rhetoric and how we talk about each
24:42
Speaker 5: other rather than something substantive like what am I missing?
24:46
Speaker 5: Like what's the fundamental revolutionary difference between your approach and
24:50
Speaker 5: what they're doing.
24:52
Speaker 3: Well, I don't actually believe that the DSA leadership, or
24:55
Speaker 3: at least the part of the DSA leadership that we're
24:57
Speaker 3: talking about, actually read that capitalism needs to be overthrown.
25:01
Speaker 3: That is why they go around saying things like we
25:03
Speaker 3: want to govern capitalism. I don't want to govern the
25:05
Speaker 3: capitalist system. I want to overthrow the capitalist system. That's
25:08
Speaker 3: not their view. If that was their view, and you know,
25:10
Speaker 3: they can speak for themselves, but I don't think so.
25:12
Speaker 3: But if that is their view, then they're going about
25:14
Speaker 3: it in exactly the wrong way, because a big part
25:18
Speaker 3: of the task of revolutionaries is to actually expose the
25:24
Speaker 3: role that is played by the representatives of the capitalist system.
25:27
Speaker 3: Because you know, a lot of peop times people are
25:29
Speaker 3: clear about or is Jeff based us on your side
25:31
Speaker 3: or not? Of course he's not on your side, and
25:33
Speaker 3: even that, you know, sometimes it's not clear. But certainly
25:36
Speaker 3: there's far more confusion about the spokespeople of the capital system,
25:40
Speaker 3: including the Democratic Party and even the Progressive Democrats. So
25:43
Speaker 3: if you look at how, for example, the one of
25:47
Speaker 3: the leaders of the New York City DSA is certainly
25:50
Speaker 3: recently responded about you know, do you think Chuck Schumer?
25:53
Speaker 3: You know, what do you think about Chuck Schumer? And
25:55
Speaker 3: she says, you know, well, I think generally I'm not
25:58
Speaker 3: opposed to him. But there and that, you know, that
26:00
Speaker 3: is the type of thing that you should not be saying,
26:02
Speaker 3: because you are you have to oppose to somebody like
26:06
Speaker 3: Chuck Schumer, you have to suppose somebody likes lu King Jeffrey.
26:08
Speaker 3: So if your goal is long term revolution, how on
26:12
Speaker 3: earth is that going to be achieved by actually being
26:16
Speaker 3: in a solidarity with the representatives of the capital system. Look,
26:20
Speaker 3: the capitalist system does not work in that way. The
26:22
Speaker 3: capitalist system is class warfare against the working class. That's
26:27
Speaker 3: very it's it's it. That's the you know, I didn't
26:29
Speaker 3: and it's not because I'm saying so that is so,
26:32
Speaker 3: and so a lot of these approaches of you know,
26:34
Speaker 3: let's let's make deals with the democrats. All of this
26:37
Speaker 3: is presented as forty chess, but it's not forty chess. Ultimately,
26:41
Speaker 3: it is a sellout of the working class. And we
26:43
Speaker 3: have been we have been through this over and over again,
26:45
Speaker 3: and at this moment it may not be clear to
26:47
Speaker 3: some people but in reality it is pointing to exactly
26:51
Speaker 3: the wrong way. And as far as that you know,
26:53
Speaker 3: you you are saying that this model has not been replicable.
26:56
Speaker 3: That is because it is very hard to do what
26:58
Speaker 3: I'm doing when you when you do what I'm doing,
27:01
Speaker 3: it makes you enemy number one of the ruling class.
27:05
Speaker 3: And that is what many of the gatekeepers, many of
27:07
Speaker 3: the gatekeepers, many of the leaders of the essay and others,
27:11
Speaker 3: they don't want to take on because on your on
27:13
Speaker 3: a personal level, it makes your life very very hard.
27:16
Speaker 3: But that is precisely the approach you need, let alone revolution,
27:19
Speaker 3: That is the approach we're going to need in order
27:22
Speaker 3: to win universal public health care. And so I don't
27:24
Speaker 3: agree with Ryan that this is just an historic point
27:27
Speaker 3: of view. This is not something historical artifact. Today we
27:30
Speaker 3: need to win universal public health care. Today, we need
27:33
Speaker 3: to end all military a to as well. Today we
27:35
Speaker 3: need to end you know, to have a permit arms.
27:38
Speaker 3: How is that going to happen? I mean, Crystal asked
27:40
Speaker 3: Adam Smith, the question, you know, why is the Democratic
27:43
Speaker 3: Party even passing an NBA right now? The question that
27:46
Speaker 3: any any of the DSA Democrats should be asking is
27:50
Speaker 3: why are the Democratic Party even passing any let alone
27:53
Speaker 3: co authoring like Adam Smith, why are you passing any
27:56
Speaker 3: or approving any kind of one red side? And for
28:01
Speaker 3: our war funding aside from veterans and from you know,
28:05
Speaker 3: soldiers salaries and improving their living standards, there should not
28:08
Speaker 3: be one red scent for war funding. But nobody in
28:10
Speaker 3: the Democratic Party is doing that, and the DAC leadership
28:13
Speaker 3: is allowing that to happen. That is what I'm talking about.
28:16
Speaker 3: So you can win small things, but even those small things,
28:19
Speaker 3: I want to be clear here, even things like rent
28:21
Speaker 3: freeze you and you are not going to be able
28:23
Speaker 3: to win that on a long term basis with this
28:26
Speaker 3: approach of sweet talking, because let's be clear what rent
28:29
Speaker 3: freeze was one. Because the billionaire class is able to
28:32
Speaker 3: read the room. They're not stupid, they understand at this
28:35
Speaker 3: moment it is it is better for them. And this
28:37
Speaker 3: is what I mean by being malleable. It is better
28:39
Speaker 3: for them to make small concessions rather than have that
28:43
Speaker 3: removed of revolt grow even further. And that's their strategy.
28:46
Speaker 3: So my question back is how are we going to
28:48
Speaker 3: win the immediate things that we need to win, which
28:51
Speaker 3: is first of all, ending all military eate these very
28:54
Speaker 3: state or formoth arms EMBI on hisself.
28:56
Speaker 2: So these a couple of things, and people a couple
28:59
Speaker 2: of things to that. So I think I won't speak
29:00
Speaker 2: for Ryan, but I think he and I have both
29:02
Speaker 2: been open to third party approaches at times. And I've
29:06
Speaker 2: just looked at the track record and I compare, for example,
29:09
Speaker 2: the impact of the Jill Stein presidential campaign versus a
29:12
Speaker 2: Bernie Sanders campaign, And first of all, Bernie came way
29:16
Speaker 2: closer to winning the White House than Jill Stein. And
29:19
Speaker 2: second of all, even though he didn't win, I don't
29:22
Speaker 2: think any of us, and I know you you know
29:23
Speaker 2: backed him in twenty sixteen and again in twenty twenty,
29:25
Speaker 2: I don't think any of us could deny the impact
29:27
Speaker 2: that his campaigns had in opening the eyes of an
29:31
Speaker 2: entire generation, in helping to motivate some of the very
29:34
Speaker 2: candidates who are now running for and winning office, and
29:37
Speaker 2: helping to build out DSA, even though you know, he
29:39
Speaker 2: wasn't directly a DSA member, as an organization that has
29:43
Speaker 2: a real membership and real organizing power and is doing
29:45
Speaker 2: a lot of the things that you're talking about here.
29:48
Speaker 2: So just from a you know, pragmatic, which approach has
29:52
Speaker 2: worked better perspective? You know, the two most consequential to
29:56
Speaker 2: me things that have happened for the left which give
29:59
Speaker 2: me the most hope right now about winning exactly the
30:02
Speaker 2: sorts of policy victories that you and I would both
30:04
Speaker 2: like to see are Bernie Sanders campaign on a Democratic
30:08
Speaker 2: line and so on, Mom, Donnie's campaign on a Democratic line.
30:11
Speaker 2: And now the movement of DSA and DSA aligned candidates
30:15
Speaker 2: who are running on the Democratic line. You mentioned the
30:17
Speaker 2: FDR example earlier. Obviously FDR was a Democrat, So why
30:22
Speaker 2: is it that that approach is wrong when to me
30:25
Speaker 2: so far it's just been vastly more successful than trying
30:30
Speaker 2: to go it alone and build something for scratch. You know,
30:32
Speaker 2: my view of the Democratic Party is that it's basically
30:35
Speaker 2: a sort of like you seem to have a view
30:37
Speaker 2: that it's like a thing, like a very powerful, tangible thing.
30:41
Speaker 2: My view that is more it's a kind of empty
30:43
Speaker 2: shell with ballot access, run by a bunch of consultants
30:46
Speaker 2: who can and are being overthrown because the base of
30:49
Speaker 2: the party doesn't agree with them and because they want
30:52
Speaker 2: to support the type of candidates that we like. So
30:55
Speaker 2: why are we you know, why are you committed to
30:58
Speaker 2: pursuing a strategy that, in my view and res history,
31:00
Speaker 2: has not been nearly as successful as the DSA approach.
31:04
Speaker 3: Well, obviously a lot of the challenges that we face
31:08
Speaker 3: is because of the absolute demise of militancy in the
31:12
Speaker 3: labor movement. So you know, you're the conclusions you're drawing,
31:15
Speaker 3: in my view are very impressionistic and superficial, because it's
31:18
Speaker 3: a question of what is actually needed to win the
31:21
Speaker 3: kinds of victories that we need to win. And that
31:23
Speaker 3: is why you have to look at history. You cannot
31:25
Speaker 3: look at it but finish.
31:27
Speaker 2: I could just pase you there on because this is
31:29
Speaker 2: to me what is so exciting about the DSA moment,
31:33
Speaker 2: because I agree with you. I mean, I think Bernie
31:35
Speaker 2: never had a prayer because there was no movement really
31:38
Speaker 2: that had been built behind him. The left was so
31:40
Speaker 2: incredibly weak. And so when I look at DSA now,
31:44
Speaker 2: I think they're up at like one hundred and twenty
31:45
Speaker 2: six thousand members. They're able to throw their weight around.
31:49
Speaker 2: It's a real membership organization doing things in the community.
31:52
Speaker 2: I look at this and I go, oh my god,
31:54
Speaker 2: this is this is what we've been needing to build
31:57
Speaker 2: for a very long time. So explain to me why
32:01
Speaker 2: you see that differently.
32:03
Speaker 3: Yeah, I mean, obviously the membership is important. That is
32:06
Speaker 3: why I'm trying to say. You're conflating the consciousness of
32:10
Speaker 3: ordinary people versus what the Democratic Party represents, and that's
32:13
Speaker 3: what I want to come to. And so as far
32:15
Speaker 3: as the membership is concerned, yeah, many members are very,
32:18
Speaker 3: very very progressive and maybe even subscribe to revolution. There's
32:22
Speaker 3: lots of ds members who are canvassing with us. They
32:24
Speaker 3: were DSA members canvassing with us yesterday at our volunteer Day.
32:28
Speaker 3: That's not the issue. The issue is what strategy actually works.
32:31
Speaker 3: And as far as the impact of Bernie Sanders, yes,
32:34
Speaker 3: you said, I currently I supported Bernie Sanders, We campaigned
32:38
Speaker 3: we don't knock for him, and I spoke at both
32:40
Speaker 3: of his rallies in the Seattle area, both in twenty
32:42
Speaker 3: sixteen and twenty twenty. And yes, that all of the
32:47
Speaker 3: message of the political revolution that really resonated with working
32:50
Speaker 3: people because working people are sick and tired. So yes,
32:53
Speaker 3: that's the conscience working class. But the main feature of
32:56
Speaker 3: the today, this of our times, is the has between
33:01
Speaker 3: the consciousness that has risen and the desire for fight
33:03
Speaker 3: back and the leadership that's on offer, and so all
33:06
Speaker 3: the picture that you painted, in my view is not
33:08
Speaker 3: actually indicative of what's actually happening. I'll tell you what's
33:11
Speaker 3: actually happening. Even despite the aggressive Democratic Progressive Caucus whatever,
33:16
Speaker 3: more and more progressive people being elected, AOC and other
33:19
Speaker 3: squad members being elected, what's to be seen since that
33:22
Speaker 3: whole time we are seeing the breaking of the railroad
33:25
Speaker 3: workers strike where only one Democrat in the House, Rashid
33:28
Speaker 3: the Talib, voted against that. Every single other Democrat, like AOC,
33:33
Speaker 3: voted to break the railroad workers strike. During that same
33:35
Speaker 3: time that you know, we are supposed to be celebrating
33:37
Speaker 3: all of these elections, we're seeing the general side being
33:40
Speaker 3: launched and being funded. We're seeing is tellar, we're seeing
33:44
Speaker 3: zero fight back against Trump. And that is part of
33:46
Speaker 3: a big part of the anger against the Democratic Party
33:49
Speaker 3: is that they're not fighting against Trump. That's also a
33:51
Speaker 3: big part of the support for my campaign against Adam Smith,
33:54
Speaker 3: which is not only that Adam Smith himself has been
33:56
Speaker 3: an instigator. He created you know, you voted to creatize,
34:00
Speaker 3: voted to fund eyes repeatedly to the tune of one
34:02
Speaker 3: hundred and fifteen billion dollars, but also because they're angry
34:05
Speaker 3: at the Democratic Party as a whole for not fighting
34:08
Speaker 3: against all of these ills. So you know, in the
34:10
Speaker 3: same period that all of this consciousness has risen in Congress,
34:15
Speaker 3: you are seeing horrific things happen. And let me again
34:19
Speaker 3: say that the minimum wage is still seven dollars twenty
34:23
Speaker 3: five cents an hour. So my question to all of
34:26
Speaker 3: these people, who are you know, like yourself, you're subscribing
34:29
Speaker 3: to this approach, My question is why is it that
34:32
Speaker 3: not one single concrete victory can be pointed to at
34:35
Speaker 3: the congressional level, and also that at that same time
34:38
Speaker 3: the genocide has actually happened. Why is it that you
34:41
Speaker 3: don't have a single Congress member saying, you know, the
34:44
Speaker 3: progressives or squad members saying, I'm going to bring forward
34:47
Speaker 3: this bill and you know, to end all military eate,
34:49
Speaker 3: and I'm going to campaign across the nation to mobilize
34:52
Speaker 3: working class people. And that is the main thing. Mobilizing
34:55
Speaker 3: working class people is the core component of what we
34:59
Speaker 3: need to do, which which is what we don't see
35:00
Speaker 3: the DSA thing, and I don't agree with you. I
35:02
Speaker 3: don't agree with you that it's the same thing that
35:04
Speaker 3: they're doing. No, they're not. They're not actually mobilizing the
35:08
Speaker 3: working class in the way that we are doing. They
35:10
Speaker 3: they have membership, yes, but they are not actually bringing
35:13
Speaker 3: the mass movements to bear. And as far as your
35:16
Speaker 3: contention that the Democratic Party is an empty shell, let's
35:19
Speaker 3: speak clear. It is not just about the structure of
35:21
Speaker 3: this thing called the Democratic Party. It is about actual
35:25
Speaker 3: class forces under capitalism. And the fundamental question is not
35:28
Speaker 3: even about the Democratic Party and whether that can be reformed, Yes,
35:32
Speaker 3: that's the question. But the primary question is can you
35:35
Speaker 3: actually win the kind of victories that we're talking about
35:39
Speaker 3: on the basis of not carrying out an all out
35:42
Speaker 3: class war back against the billionaire class and their representatives.
35:46
Speaker 3: That's the question, and my view that answer is no,
35:49
Speaker 3: And that is you know, all of history is that,
35:51
Speaker 3: all the examples I gave you, they all show that decisively.
35:54
Speaker 3: In fact, many of the victories in Western Europe one
35:57
Speaker 3: under in the wake of the workers revolution in Russia,
36:00
Speaker 3: which was obviously a revolution one by monsters like myself.
36:03
Speaker 3: And so that is the background for anything that we
36:06
Speaker 3: can win. It's actually bringing the revolt of the working
36:10
Speaker 3: class to bear and can that be done? So that's
36:13
Speaker 3: the primary question. Can that be done? Can that kind
36:15
Speaker 3: of class war back against the billionaire class? Can that
36:19
Speaker 3: be done from a party of the billionaires? Maybe maybe done?
36:24
Speaker 3: In my view, it can't be done, but you know that.
36:26
Speaker 3: To concretize that question, my question is this, even if
36:29
Speaker 3: you run as a democrat, that's you know, you can
36:31
Speaker 3: run as a democrat. Maybe I could have run as
36:33
Speaker 3: a democrat. That's not the question. The question is would
36:36
Speaker 3: you be would you would you would you be able
36:38
Speaker 3: to do that kind of class war for the working
36:41
Speaker 3: class that I did in in a way that does
36:45
Speaker 3: not make you enemy number one of the democratic establishment. No,
36:49
Speaker 3: that's the answer. The answer to that question is no.
36:52
Speaker 3: So whether even if you ran as a Democrat, let's
36:54
Speaker 3: let's comprotize this question. All these new people who are
36:57
Speaker 3: now almost you know, November is happening, but they're almost
37:01
Speaker 3: guaranteed to get into Congress. The question is can they
37:05
Speaker 3: do what's needed in order to fight for the working
37:08
Speaker 3: class and not earn the ire of the democratic establishment. No,
37:12
Speaker 3: the answer is no. That is why AOC is quote
37:15
Speaker 3: AOC was very truthful when she said that if she
37:18
Speaker 3: did what was demanded of her by the working class,
37:21
Speaker 3: that would have caused reputational and relational harm for her
37:24
Speaker 3: among the powers that be. As far as working people
37:27
Speaker 3: is concerned, your reputations are going to be You'll be
37:29
Speaker 3: over an overnight hero. Even to this day, are people
37:32
Speaker 3: coming up to me in grocery stores and saying that,
37:34
Speaker 3: thank you for fighting for this or that. But as
37:37
Speaker 3: far as the Democratic establishment it's concerned, No, they hate me. Well,
37:40
Speaker 3: I were their hate of me as a badge of
37:42
Speaker 3: honor because for me it's a confirmation that I'm doing
37:45
Speaker 3: something right. So fundamentally, the question is can you actually
37:48
Speaker 3: win the kinds of victories that we can win we
37:51
Speaker 3: need to win without going to class work back against
37:54
Speaker 3: the billionaires and their representatives. No, the answer is no.
37:57
Speaker 5: I'm back to your campaign in particular, I think in
38:00
Speaker 5: twenty twenty four, correct me if I'm wrong, you left
38:02
Speaker 5: the Democratic Socials from America. Your campaign reached out to
38:07
Speaker 5: DSA to get an endorsement. I know there was something
38:09
Speaker 5: about a deadline, and there it went to a vote. Effectively,
38:12
Speaker 5: there was a very close vote and DSA voted. You know,
38:15
Speaker 5: effectively not to endorse your campaign. Like what happened? Like,
38:20
Speaker 5: how is it that an independent socialist campaign that you
38:25
Speaker 5: had this legacy of success in the in the twenty
38:28
Speaker 5: tens wasn't able to win the support of the Democratic
38:32
Speaker 5: Socials of America in Seattle.
38:35
Speaker 3: Yeah. I think the primarily the story here is of
38:38
Speaker 3: textbook sectarianism, which is that they have some some you know,
38:44
Speaker 3: personal objections to my approach, and that is why they've
38:48
Speaker 3: decided not to actually endorse a campaign that is posing
38:52
Speaker 3: the strongest ever challenge to Adam Smith, who is a
38:56
Speaker 3: general among the warmonger So I think that is the
38:58
Speaker 3: real question. And like you said, correctly, yeah, it was
38:59
Speaker 3: a host boat and and as I already said, many
39:03
Speaker 3: DSA members are campaigning alongside us. So this is really
39:07
Speaker 3: the position that the leadership took. And in that boat,
39:10
Speaker 3: they you know, they made a lot of personalized attacks
39:13
Speaker 3: against me. One of those attacks was, oh, look, she
39:15
Speaker 3: can't even be bothered to come to our endorsement meeting.
39:18
Speaker 3: She's out there, you know, gallimanting for herself in the
39:21
Speaker 3: Bay Area. And they well knew as I did, as
39:25
Speaker 3: I've said publicly, I was in the Bay Area for
39:28
Speaker 3: a rally for Calcare, you know, the California White Universal
39:31
Speaker 3: health Care Medicare for All, to help the campaign there.
39:35
Speaker 3: I was invited by a rank and file union members
39:38
Speaker 3: there from the teachers Union and who was not at
39:41
Speaker 3: that rally. The DSA leadership of the Bay Area was
39:44
Speaker 3: not at that rally, the leadership of any of the
39:46
Speaker 3: labor unions was not at that rally. But we had
39:49
Speaker 3: many rank and file leaders and lots of workers there.
39:53
Speaker 3: So I was not there for my own sake. I
39:55
Speaker 3: was there for the for supporting Calcare. So you know,
39:58
Speaker 3: it was on the brass of these types of personalized
40:01
Speaker 3: attacks based on fall foods that they did it. But ultimately,
40:05
Speaker 3: you know, this is my question, really is that how
40:08
Speaker 3: is it that you're putting all of these petty differences
40:11
Speaker 3: ahead of the interests of the Palestinian people. Look, I'm
40:15
Speaker 3: deadly serious here, you know, And as I said, you
40:17
Speaker 3: may agree or disagree with me on any given question,
40:20
Speaker 3: but I am completely truthful. I will never bullshit anyone,
40:23
Speaker 3: and I am non sectarian, meaning I always put the
40:27
Speaker 3: interest of the working class ahead. So you know, for example,
40:29
Speaker 3: we have supported, many endorsed and also campaign for many
40:33
Speaker 3: DSA endorsed candidates. We have done that, even though we
40:35
Speaker 3: have differences with them, we agreed that this is if
40:38
Speaker 3: they were to win. They didn't win, but if they
40:40
Speaker 3: were to win, that would be a step forward for
40:42
Speaker 3: the working class and we have to put our differences
40:44
Speaker 3: aside and support them. We did that. Unfortunately, the DASA
40:47
Speaker 3: leadership has chosen not to and that is the thing
40:50
Speaker 3: I wanted to put the spotlight on because it is
40:52
Speaker 3: not about me. You can love me or hate me,
40:54
Speaker 3: I don't care. I'm not here for personal reasons. It
40:57
Speaker 3: is at this moment it is about the working class.
41:00
Speaker 3: It's about the misery that the working class is living
41:02
Speaker 3: in where in the richest country in the history of humanity,
41:05
Speaker 3: half of American households cannot afford groceries. But most urgently,
41:09
Speaker 3: it is about the Palestinian people, and it's about the
41:12
Speaker 3: innocent people in Lebanon and Yemen and so on who
41:15
Speaker 3: are being slaughtered. That's the question. And so this is
41:18
Speaker 3: textbook sectarianism, and it's really tragic for them to say,
41:22
Speaker 3: why we have some complaints about trauma Sawan and so
41:25
Speaker 3: we are not going to support the strongest ever challenge
41:27
Speaker 3: against Adam Smith because keep in mind if I were
41:30
Speaker 3: to enter the November election, and you know, and even
41:34
Speaker 3: that itself would be electrifying, it would put look at
41:36
Speaker 3: the pressure. It's all Adam Smith right now, he's voting
41:39
Speaker 3: against his own fucking bill. He co authored that bill
41:43
Speaker 3: that he voted against that, and obviously he was done
41:45
Speaker 3: on the basis of making sure that the Democrats could
41:48
Speaker 3: win the billing. Sorry, the Establishment could win the bill
41:51
Speaker 3: and there were just enough Democrats to help that. But
41:53
Speaker 3: the point is that he's under so much pressure that
41:56
Speaker 3: he is having to do that. That is the strongest
41:58
Speaker 3: ever challenge. I mean, if you came to this district
42:00
Speaker 3: you would see. I mean, there is an absolute buzz
42:03
Speaker 3: about our campaign. I can't guarantee that we will get
42:06
Speaker 3: to into November election, but my point is that we
42:08
Speaker 3: are doing everything in our power to do that. And
42:11
Speaker 3: it is really tragic that the DAC leadership has decided
42:14
Speaker 3: not to support the strongest ever challenge against Adam Smith,
42:17
Speaker 3: because we have to make it about the Postinian people,
42:20
Speaker 3: not about all internal differences. Right now, we see the
42:22
Speaker 3: genocide dangerously expanding into the West Bank. It is absolutely
42:26
Speaker 3: horrific what they're doing with the violent settlements and be
42:29
Speaker 3: able to keep that at the center.
42:31
Speaker 2: Kajan, And my last question for you on this point,
42:35
Speaker 2: what would you say to people who would argue that
42:38
Speaker 2: you're letting the perfect be the enemy of the good.
42:41
Speaker 2: You know, your Colin Zorn Salaun tool the billionaire class. Meanwhile,
42:45
Speaker 2: it's not just Adam Smith who is having to shift
42:48
Speaker 2: his position under pressure. You know, there was a majority,
42:51
Speaker 2: closer majority of the Democratic Caucus who voted to block
42:53
Speaker 2: all ISRAELID. It's not out of the goodness of their hearts.
42:56
Speaker 2: It's because they are feeling the pressure from the base
42:59
Speaker 2: and from these DSA aligned candidates too, who are running
43:03
Speaker 2: against them in primaries. You know, it'd be one thing
43:05
Speaker 2: if Adam Smith was the only one who change his vote,
43:07
Speaker 2: but it was all of them. So there clearly is
43:10
Speaker 2: pressure on the Democratic establishment. You do have progress being
43:14
Speaker 2: made in terms of Zoron in New York City. You know,
43:17
Speaker 2: the establishment talk about being you know, enemy number one.
43:20
Speaker 2: They absolutely hate Abdulla Assiety even though he isn't directly DSA.
43:23
Speaker 2: They're spending tens of millions of dollars, Like, why would
43:26
Speaker 2: they do that if this movement isn't a threat to them?
43:30
Speaker 2: In some ways. And so if you're spending so much
43:33
Speaker 2: time and look, I have my critiques of zor on
43:35
Speaker 2: Aoc all these people as well. But when you're dismissing
43:37
Speaker 2: the whole thing is their sellance, their tools of billionaire class,
43:40
Speaker 2: aren't you undercutting the one thing that is actually the
43:44
Speaker 2: most potent right now, that is having the most impact
43:46
Speaker 2: in our politics and is most likely to secure the
43:49
Speaker 2: most near term victories for working class people.
43:53
Speaker 3: What is most important? See that's where I have a
43:56
Speaker 3: disagreement with you. What is most important is the consciousness
43:59
Speaker 3: of the man, the working class. And yes, it is
44:02
Speaker 3: absolutely has contained potential in itself to win victories. But
44:07
Speaker 3: if you talk about near term victories, what is the
44:09
Speaker 3: most important near term victory we need, which is for
44:12
Speaker 3: the genocide to end, for the forever wars in in
44:15
Speaker 3: the Middle East end, that is, in the war on
44:17
Speaker 3: Iran to end. That is that is the most near
44:18
Speaker 3: term important.
44:20
Speaker 2: Think milat Heiros, Daria, Lisa Vila Chevalier. Don't you think
44:27
Speaker 2: that they will clar Valdez. Don't you think that they
44:29
Speaker 2: will be an important part of securing that victory?
44:32
Speaker 3: I mean, like I said, the consciousness and the anger
44:36
Speaker 3: of the working class that has propelled them to victory.
44:39
Speaker 3: Absolutely is the central component. But and I agree with
44:43
Speaker 3: you that right now there's so much pressure on the
44:45
Speaker 3: Democratic Party that they're having to maneuver around it. But
44:49
Speaker 3: it is but that is but those are not the metrics.
44:51
Speaker 3: That is why you have to use the correct metrics. Yes,
44:54
Speaker 3: those are important developments, but the question is what is
44:57
Speaker 3: actually going to end military a ways. Well, that is
45:00
Speaker 3: where the you know, that is where the rubber hits
45:03
Speaker 3: the load. And that is why I'm saying that, yes,
45:06
Speaker 3: this movement is a threat, but the direction in which
45:09
Speaker 3: many of the ds leaders are taking it, that is
45:11
Speaker 3: not what's going to yield the victories that we need
45:14
Speaker 3: because that's not what's happened so far. Because we have
45:17
Speaker 3: seen a genocide actually come into existence at the same
45:22
Speaker 3: time that more DSA nominated DSA endorsed people were being elected.
45:27
Speaker 3: That is the example I'm using confide example to show
45:30
Speaker 3: that actually what you are going to need. And so no,
45:33
Speaker 3: I mean, yeah, it's ore the victories that have been
45:36
Speaker 3: one of course, and like I said, I haven't wantonly
45:39
Speaker 3: criticized Mahmdani. I don't agree with your characterization that I'm
45:43
Speaker 3: just generally gone around criticizing our criticized DSA leaders. It's
45:47
Speaker 3: not just about Mamdani on specific things that they have
45:49
Speaker 3: done which I completely disagree with. And it's my responsibility
45:53
Speaker 3: to point the working class movement in the correct direction.
45:56
Speaker 3: And when I think that something is pointing in the
45:58
Speaker 3: exact wrong direction, and like endorsing Kathiokal or like endorsing
46:03
Speaker 3: Qem Jeffries, it is my job to point out. But
46:06
Speaker 3: it is a non sectarian approach, meaning that I have also,
46:09
Speaker 3: at the same time openly declared that I support every
46:12
Speaker 3: demand that Mumdani ran on. And if there is a
46:14
Speaker 3: movement in New York City to win a thirty dollars
46:17
Speaker 3: an hour minimum wage, I will personally be there helping
46:19
Speaker 3: that movement to win. But it is a question of
46:21
Speaker 3: what will actually win the victories we need. So what
46:24
Speaker 3: you see from the Democratic and Republican Partice right now
46:27
Speaker 3: is them being what I call a malleable system. They
46:31
Speaker 3: are adjusting their approaches just enough in order to be
46:35
Speaker 3: able to survive, and they themselves are openly admitting and
46:38
Speaker 3: I read you the vote from political from this establishment guy,
46:41
Speaker 3: and so they are doing just enough and they will
46:43
Speaker 3: continue to do just enough for them to be able
46:46
Speaker 3: to survive. And that is why what we need to
46:48
Speaker 3: do is I recognize that they are under pressure and
46:51
Speaker 3: really go be as ruthless at the capitalist class is
46:55
Speaker 3: against the working class. It is the job of working
46:57
Speaker 3: class leaders to be ruthless against the capital class. And
47:00
Speaker 3: so that is the question, and that is why I
47:02
Speaker 3: would urge everybody who's watching this please support us in
47:06
Speaker 3: our primary campaign. The primary election is August fourth. We
47:09
Speaker 3: are fighting to end all military eight to Israel, for
47:12
Speaker 3: a permanent arms embargo on the Israel the state. We're
47:14
Speaker 3: fighting for free healthcare for all funded by taxing the ridge,
47:17
Speaker 3: for national rund control, and for a national twenty five
47:19
Speaker 3: dollars our minimum wage, which we think should be at
47:21
Speaker 3: least thirty in big cities. And this is the strongest
47:24
Speaker 3: ever challenge against Adam Smith. We have a real shot,
47:27
Speaker 3: but obviously we have everything stacked against us. The corporate
47:29
Speaker 3: media has done a blackout, and despite all of that,
47:32
Speaker 3: we have a real dynamic in the district and we
47:36
Speaker 3: have so many people coming and saying that they've already voted,
47:38
Speaker 3: but ballots are out. If you're in the district, make
47:41
Speaker 3: sure you vote for our campaign. August fourth is the deadline.
47:43
Speaker 3: If you're able to canvass with us, please do so.
47:46
Speaker 3: Go to Chamasawa org, donate and sign up for phone
47:49
Speaker 3: banking ships no matter where you are in the nation.
47:51
Speaker 2: Shauma, I always appreciate your fight, and I certainly appreciate
47:54
Speaker 2: your time today. Thank you so much for spending some
47:55
Speaker 2: time with us this morning. Thank you so much for
47:58
Speaker 2: having me our pleasure. All Right, interesting exchange there, don't
48:01
Speaker 2: you think?
48:01
Speaker 3: Yes, you do like that.
48:02
Speaker 5: The primary is August fourth, we'll see see. There was
48:05
Speaker 5: a Republican independent, other Democrat and then Adam Smith. So
48:08
Speaker 5: the top two move on to the gym.
48:09
Speaker 2: There's a weird thing going on with the other Democrat too,
48:12
Speaker 2: where she like sat for an endorsement interview.
48:14
Speaker 5: And yes, people, so she we don't get into we
48:17
Speaker 5: won't get too far into it real quickly. She ran
48:20
Speaker 5: this I think Melissa Chowdery is her name. She ran
48:22
Speaker 5: last time and got like thirty percent of the vote.
48:24
Speaker 5: She was doing an endorsement interview with Kashama with the
48:28
Speaker 5: stranger on the record, the local paper there, and she
48:32
Speaker 5: told the stranger, I'm going to switch to Green Party
48:34
Speaker 5: if I win. But let's keep that off the record.
48:39
Speaker 2: This is literally on the record, on the record, on
48:41
Speaker 2: your whole thing is sitting right now, right here.
48:43
Speaker 4: Yeah.
48:44
Speaker 2: Anyway, so interesting backstory there, very interesting election. I'm sure
48:48
Speaker 2: you guys will pay attention as we will see the results.
48:50
Speaker 2: Emily is in for Sager tomorrow. I am in for
48:53
Speaker 2: Ryan on Wednesdays a week. Very busy lady this week,
48:57
Speaker 2: but in any case, I will see you back here tomorrow.
49:00
Speaker 3: Set the boy quick,