On Platner

A lesson about Power Over

Photo by Jon Tyson on Unsplash

Two days ago, I posted a note on substack offering a political analysis regarding a narrow window of opportunity for true socialists and anarchists, that would become viable if AOC ran for president in 2028 and won. I argued that AOC would do this if Abdul El-Sayed won the Michigan mid-term, and Graham Platner won the Maine mid-term. My reasoning is that if self-styled progressives gain prominence, and institutional Democrats lose their grip on the DNC, there would be a period of probably around 18 months where some projects and regulations and legislation would shift just enough to provide a small amount of material relief to the working class, and in that buffer zone, communities could build a prefigurative politics of dual power with which they could not only resist capital and the state, but perhaps even render aspects of it obsolete and ineffective.

This was not an endorsement of any of these political candidates, but an analysis based on my understanding of electoral political dynamics in the US. The analysis stands, but something strange happened in the comment section of the note.
https://substack.com/@anarcasper/note/c-288499774?r=xlgc2

Graham Platner’s campaign was plagued with controversy. From Nazi tattoos and defense of a neo-nazi on reddit, to out of wedlock sexting and claims of consensual cheating, to statements of abuse by a former girlfriend who was claimed to be a conservative republican operative, and possibly the most damning, was his time as a mercenary in Iraq for Blackwater. (All details I wasn’t aware of until now, which is my failure, even if it was beyond the scope of the point I was making.)

My analysis was not about whether Platner was a good person or not. It was not about whether the DNC intends to do right by the people or not. It was a consequentialist analysis of US Electoral dynamics, and a very tiny opportunity that might become available under a very remote set of circumstances.

Nevertheless, mentioning Platner as a potential catalyst sparked immediate backlash. My subsequent comments only made things worse. I pointed out that his platform, whatever one thought of him personally, was progressive enough to complicate the electoral dynamics for Maine voters. This was not a defense of him, but an observation about why objecting to his primary win was politically tricky. The nuance was lost. I was labelled a Nazi sympathizer and enabler.

The accusation isn't remotely true, but it forced me to self-reflect. Had I inadvertently given the impression that I was cheering Platner on by suggesting his win could open a window for the revolutionary left? I suppose I did. That wasn't my intent, and it wasn't even the point of the analysis. But I should have done more research and stipulated clearly that a monster could still open a window of opportunity. And the DNC certainly did not care in the slightest that Platner had the word Nazi attached to him far more closely than anyone should be comfortable with. Despite all their pearl clutching about civil rights and liberties, and virtue signalling about their “progressive” stance on social issues, the DNC have spent at least half a century paving the way for fascism by incessantly selling out the working class and backing capital to the hilt. They have very openly embraced the genocidal fascist regime of Israel, and have consistently managed to start or continue war after war killing brown people all over the world. This is not a party of good, benevolent people working hard to make the world a better place. It is a party of power-mongers that actively engage in war profiteering, revolving door corporate protectionism, and union-busting like it’s a passionate hobby.

So how would my analysis shift in light of Platner’s genuine problematic nature? The honest answer is, the analysis doesn’t shift at all. If any democrat won the Maine mid-term, and AOC uses this signal, the window of opportunity would still open up. All of which is essentially moot now, since Platner is likely to drop out of the race because of the latest controversy of credible sexual assault allegations. The DNC support for him has dried up, and there are no real contenders that stand a chance of winning against Collins later this year. It is morbidly fascinating that sexual assault is the arbitrary line drawn in the sand rather than Nazism or the time spent in as a mercenary for one of the most morally corrupt companies to ever exist.

I am not American, and I don't have any direct skin in the game (though American foreign policy has always affected my life, and this year has drastically affected myself, and my family and friends here in the Middle East). I certainly have no sway in the state of Maine. In fact, the only sway I would want to have in US electoral politics, is to influence the people of the United States to disengage from electoralism altogether. As I pointed out in another note, the state doesn’t need your vote to continue self-legitimizing. https://substack.com/@anarcasper/note/c-286921134?r=xlgc2

But since just enough of the US keeps resorting to electoralism instead of throwing their energy into building resilient prefigurative communities, Electoral Political dynamics still require analysis. There is Power in analysis. It offers the kind of clarity that leads to Power Within oneself. It provides a clear view of the playing field so that our Power To take action is made tangible. It reveals connections that cultivate our Power With community. It cultivates the field of potential that allows cascading changes to materialize as we gain Power Through the new systems we build. And it reveals the deep contradiction of powerlessness that underpins the motivations of those with Power Over us.

Platner’s motivations require analysis that I did not address in the note I wrote. He sought to use popular anti-billionaire sentiment to gain office. Had he won, there might have been opportunity for those resisting empire to make headway, but they would also have been required to deal with Platner’s term in office, and whatever harms he would be bringing to the table.

And now we have the blowback of Platner’s supporters online, enraged at the the temerity of people rejecting him for sexually assaulting a woman, going on witch-hunts to try and shift blame away from him, and onto literally everyone else. Accusations of being paid shills for republicans, accusations of being Zionists, accusations of being corporate bots that just want to avoid electoral finance reform. All of which indicates a kind of desperation for anything that isn’t more of the status quo. It’s all deeply misguided, but it comes from a place of the very powerlessness I described earlier. Lacking the community structures to effect change from below, they cling to the electoralist fantasy. Their witch-hunts are not about defending Platner; they are about defending the process itself, because if this candidate fails, they have no Plan B.