“They're applauding as federal troops patrol D.C. streets. (With good results as it happens)”
That sure sounds like he is saying the deployment of troops ha had “good results” but maybe I’m wrong. I would hope Corbin Trent would not say something so ridiculous.
Is it even necessary to mention the troops invading blue cities has absolutely zero to do with crime?
The point of this entire piece is that there is a revolution happening both politically otherwise. Part of understanding that is realizing reality and then being able to argue against ideas in the face of that reality. The reality is that violent crime is down since the occupation of National Guard troops. That is not something that we get to debate really. So we have to accept that and then have a counter argument. That was the reason for the parenthetical addition.
The point is that the idea that the National Guard troops are there to fight crime is engaging in a false premise from the start. It is patently obvious that Trump is not deploying troops in blue cities because of crime, or immigrant protests, or for any reason other than normalizing military presence in Democratic cities (not coincidentally, run by Black mayors).
By even engaging in that utterly false idea, you are buying right into Trump’s propaganda and conceding ground that it might actually be a good thing and ignoring why they are actually there.
This also ignores so many other aspects (troops picking up trash, centered in high profile , low crime areas, doing terrible damage to local business, cities in red states with far higher crime rates, crime already trending down in DC etc).
Not to mention that, obviously, if anyone floods a city with so much military presence that people are afraid to go out, crime may drop. Hooray. Let’s arrest everyone all the time, then crime really will vanish.
Fair, but it should be noted that crime was down in the city before the military occupation. Yes, it's down even more now that the military has taken over the city. Our counterargument to that half-baked success story is that we've lost some degree of our civil liberties as a result of the occupation. For instance, a protest monitor was arrested by the Guard on Labor Day at Union Station. He was taking a nap, because after all, the Veterans encampment is a 24/7 operation, and no one there is getting a good night's rest. The Guard claimed the monitor had graffitied the monument where he slept with chalk. I didn't see it. These sorts of accusations are all they need to pick citizens up and to be disappeared...and that's exactly what they're doing. It's a mistake for those of us on the Left to be reiterating ANY of their half-baked lies.
Of course a military occupation is likely to reduce crime. I imagine EVERYONE is reluctant to venture out! And yes, big cities (red and blue) do have more crime and I'm sure would benefit from more federal (our tax money) support for appropriate local community policing and social services!
Fair comment. I thought the same, but was willing to overlook it given the larger purpose behind the article. My interpretation: MAGA is "applauding as federal troops patrol DC streets." That's a given. The complicated prose is: "(With good results as it happens)". I'm from DC, so maybe I have some helpful perspective. They've indeed arrested over 1,000 people over the last three weeks. That's a fact. Unfortunately, most are brown and black-skinned blue-collar workers (with and without citizenship documentation), homeless, or community members of militarized neighborhoods that are defending each other. The once minority-majority city is largely vacant, eerily quiet, with only whites venturing out into the streets during the day. No doubt the way Trump wants it. And yet, you try to have a conversation with anyone Right-of-Center and they're convinced the streets are safer with armed military personnel on them. Even that Schumercrat, Mayor Bowser, is repeating the hypocrisy (in a shameless effort to get $2B from the Federal government for 'beautifican' projects). Fortunately, there's an effort afoot by Refuse Fascism to occupy and shut down DC. A mass mobilization action starting on November 5 and lasting until the regime falls. Check it here: https://refusefascism.org/category/organizing-toolkits/
Thanks - even 1000 more arrests over 3 weeks after deploying 2000+ troops doesn’t sound like much to me for a city the size of DC. So that could be seen as 2+ troops for a single arrest over that whole time frame?
And, as you say, it’s much worse when looking just a bit more closely at what they are actually doing and who they are targeting.
Hi Corbin, Just read this morning on WPR that St. John's Lutheran Church is tearing down their 1906 church in Madison, WI and rebuilding a lower level sanctuary with 10 story structure with 130 housing units, 110 of which have capped rents...available in tier to people making no more than 30, 50 or 60% of the area's median income. They hope to break ground this fall. HOPE.
Okay, I totally agree with you and a plan to move forward by tackling what folks need differently. Here’s the problem: every day I my email and text that are filled with candidates—good ones—from all over the country, National, state and local organizations, news organizations all asking for donations. My husband and I are on a fixed income as well as many other, the paycheck to paycheck folks, the unhoused, the base of the Democratic Party. We write letters and post cards, put up signs, get folks registered to vote, sign up to drive folks to vote go to rallies, but can’t bankroll all the things we need to do. WHERE DOES THE MONEY COME FROM to fight the war chest of the oligarch has. Trump just made 5 billion dollars for goodness sake. It’s hard to believe we can pull off what we need to do to win.
We’ll never win the money race with Republicans and corporate Democrats who have access to billions of dollars, thousands of millions $. But perhaps we don’t need millions to win elections if all those good, progressive Democratic candidates, who bombard us with daily emails and texts, collaborate and run as a unified slate. If they organized themselves into a battalion, a network, a cooperative intent on taking over Congress, the presidency, and as many state and local offices as possible.
Running individually, these newcomers can be easily buried under millions of dollars of advertising by corporate Democrats or Republicans. But fire up the imaginations of voters with the vision of a progressive slate that, if elected, will work in a unified and concerted manner to really change government to be one that works to make life better for regular people.
Describe the plan to fix the nation, step by step- with concrete plans- laws and policies- not bland platitudes. Let’s give the people the detailed vision of how we’d improve health care, education, energy, banking, transportation, land management, labor policy, housing, access to healthy food and water, employment. Every candidate in the slate campaigns to elect the whole slate. Candidates share rallies, combining local with regional with national. Create huge campaign events. Create a website and social media that effectively reaches voters.
As Corbin says, if we present non-corporate choices for a pro-worker government, and elect super majorities, then we can transform the nation.
Looking forward to seeing your Contract With America. Recommend you crowd source the review and editing. Many of us have lived experience inside the Federal Civil Service that will help make it successful. This is the lesson from Project 2025 and Trump II - we have to be clear about how to use the levers of power, and what’s standing in the way.
I know recreating a government that actually serves the common good is a complex task, particularly for a country that's as large and diverse as ours. I think your Builder's approach is very valid. However, I feel we need a simple guiding principal. I once attended a camp where we only had one rule, and that was "To Be Considerate". It applied to everything and really worked! I would like to see a government devoid of party labels that has only one rule as a guiding principal, and I would suggest that it be some version of "The Golden Rule". Would go a long way toward fostering a government for the common good.
Agree. I also note (1 the enduring power of GH Bush's speeechwriter's phrase, "a kinder, gentle nation."
And (2) the recent meme starting from the 2025 Superman movie, "To be kind to yourself and others is the new punk" (the antidote to Rump's pro-brutality, fragile masculinity culture)
I feel strongly that the focus now should be on getting humanity tuned into the metacrisis. Until people know how we figure to go back to the Stone Age unless we do something to avert that, we’re not going to do anything to mitigate against disaster ahead. How to wise up humanity should be first on our do-do list.
My latest idea for how to get big moves to happen, without any charismatic leader showing the way, is for people like you and me to get into comments on each other, like I’m doing here, to have mini exchanges like this. If something interesting emerged, we could put it in Notes for more of the Substack world to comment on. Get the whole Substack universe buzzing with creative thinking about how to get humanity to turn away from hurting each other and turn toward saving ourselves.
Yes, an ideal evolution of this vibrant comments section is to make it into a bulletin board of local "thousands points of light" of good people building good things for worker-ownership and working families. Post projects needing more volunteers, workers and donors.
I wasn't thinking of just this space, since we're in an era where no single savior entity is the way to go. My idea is for people with real knowledge to engage in each other's Substacks so that there's buzz from everywhere.
It would be a daunting challenge for me to get beyond saying that it's the Substack version of social networking that I am far from an expert in. I suggest asking Google, since there doesn't seem to be a place on Substack to talk about its processes. I wonder why oh why there isn't a Suggestion Box.
I share your frustration that the people who hold positions of influence- elected officials, those with power and access to the microphone- seem incompetent or unwilling to take real action to stop the destruction of our democracy. Corbin suggests that thoughtful citizens collaborate and begin to compose/devise a plan for rebuilding the country, and thereafter gain support of the majority of voters to bring about real change. He appears to be willing to be the scribe for the Rebuilding America plan. He welcomes input from others and admits he alone doesn’t have all the answers. We can start writing that document here.
It sounds good to create the plan, but what Corbin sent was daunting. Too much to take in and respond to. I wonder what a process could be that would be manageable. Maybe go sequentially, one part after another?
Here is the crux of it. While I agree that the Democratic Party is probably the vehicle which is best suited to effectively address the authoritarian push, voters must establish a red line that can’t be crossed in order to get the eventual supermajorities desired for transformation. And that red line might seem counterintuitive, for it requires the withholding of votes from some, if not many, Democratic Party candidates.
That red line is never voting for any DP candidate who might be in leadership, or in line for leadership, that can be shown, via our limited transparency in campaign contribution data, to be influenced by monied interests, corporate or private.
It’s the only way to remove the rot that prevents the transformation. Vote for socialists like Ware for governor in CA, Sawant for congress in WA, or for Democrats who ‘get it’ like Platner for senate in Maine, or independents like Osborn in NE. Only vote for those who aren’t corporate-owned, and are willing to fight for working people, and maybe the Democratic Party will see the light.
No votes for people like Schumer, or Jeffries, or Biden, or Harris, or any of their protégés who display fealty to large donors at the expense of the 99%. Quit thinking you owe the Democrats your vote, even in the face of GOP lunacy. If you voted for Biden/Harris in the last election, in the face of their corporate-owned campaign, not to mention support for a damn genocide, you are part of the problem here, and just as culpable as the misguided Trump voters in abetting the authoritarian surge.
Unfortunately, while there is some truth to old adage that all politics is local, and there are many examples of local governments endorsing many progressive policies, until we clear the systemic rot on the federal level, in all three branches, we get nowhere when it comes to fixing what ails us, from wealth inequality to the transition from an endless war economy to climate.
We have to start with building a progressive majority in the federal legislative branch. That means electing as many progressive independents, third-party candidates, and Democrats, and even the rare GOP member willing to sign on to HJR-54, in order to begin to overthrow corporate rule. Neither party is willing, currently, to nominate a presidential candidate willing to side with labor, unequivocally, and use the bully pulpit to that end.
It’s only going to happen one seat at a time. The longer liberals keep looking at this as D vs. R, and always voting for corporate-owned candidates just because of a D beside the name, the longer the rot continues, and grows.
I hate to come across as a one trick pony, but, imo, the way to keep people engaged in this fight, across multiple election cycles, is raising awareness about HJR-54 (MoveToAmend.org), explaining the critical nature of its passage as the biggest tool in the toolkit to overthrow the corporate coup, which then opens the door to progressive public policy, on every issue people care about. Every potential voter should be aware of HJR-54, actively support those candidates willing to cosponsor, refuse to vote for those who don’t, and begin to build the power of the 99% by making working people understand this can happen.
The 18yo vote amendment took less than a year to ratify. Same with this one, if we can just get it to the floor for a vote. That comes with public pressure on elected officials/candidates; the only way to flip the levers of power in our favor.
". . . corporations have no consciences, no beliefs, no feelings, no personhood. Corporations are not “We the People” by whom and for whom our Constitution was established" ~ ~Supreme Court Justice Stevens, January 2010
I am convinced that a revived labor movement (infused and united with the cooperative movement) is needed to lead and solidify the rebuilding and revolutionizing of the Democratic Party. This People’s Labor Movement whose determined commitment to transform dysfunctional systems which exact economic servitude to the whims and greed of oligarchs into means to truly serve the needs of the people and repudiate the subordination of labor to capital (of people to profits), must be supported and advanced as the movement coalesces around the liberating democracy of cooperative culture and economics, a movement that respects, honors and embodies our collective selves. This is the movement of solidarity which must TAKE LEAD of the Democratic Party.
Agree, Robert :) I'm curious who else of Corbin's fans knows about cooperative alternatives to corporatism? Worker-owned, worker-run biz is the likely endgame of a healed US nation. One bottleneck now is the lack of an explicit values-spiritual vision so churches can get on board.
I just checked Substack for publications on "worker run business," "worker owned" Nothing.
I know there are websites devoted to these. What this tells me is a wave of cooperative workplaces remain ten years in the future or more.
There's one large, hidden factor that I think you might be missing. As someone who has lived in the Bible Belt my whole life, and who just wrote a book about the power of religious propaganda, I feel I need to add some context.
It's not that MAGAs are "so desperate for change that they'll embrace authoritarianism." Sure, some of them might be, but the underlying anger isn't really about economics. They will claim it is, and their propagandists will use that claim as cover, but it's bullshit. If it were really about economics, they would vote for the party offering to raise the minimum wage, eliminate student debt relief, offer cheaper (or even universal) health care, protect unions, etc.
But they never do. Why? Because they have been subjected to DECADES of propaganda, first from their religious leaders, to their AM talk radio hosts, to their favorite podcasters, to Fox News and their local Sinclair-owned TV news. The propaganda paints Democrats as, at best, clueless hippies who just want to take your "hard-earned" tax money and give it to "lazy welfare queens." At worst, and really, at the bottom of nearly all of it, they think Democrats are literally in league with Satan, intent on murdering babies, raping children, and tearing down the country. QAnon is nothing new - it's just a new spin on a lot of old conspiracy theories.
So don't fall for it. MAGAs aren't worried about their Social Security or wages, because if they were, they wouldn't keep voting for politicians who keep slashing them. They aren't embracing authoritarianism out of desperation; they were authoritarians all along.
Delani, you make a striking point, "They aren't embracing authoritarianism out of desperation; they were authoritarians all along." As one writer to another, I invite you to make this your topic sentence, add a traditional three-part thesis, then post it everywhere you can :)
Absolutely correct. I too live in the fucking Bible belt, and 90% of the population around me would happily hang me from the nearest tree if they knew I was a raging liberal democrat. That's why I'm well armed.
And Democrats do nothing to disprove the misinformation. In 2020, Biden promised to raise the minimum wage to $15/hour if elected but never did. Maybe if Democrats honored some of their campaign promises to help working people, folks in the Bible Belt would question the propaganda.
Agree! Corbin continues to be the best writer in America I know of.
What I can add is, a positive way to view Rump 2.0 to is he measures how weak US democracy has been since at least Bill Clinton. Turning away from New Deal ethos was the beginning of the end, the beginning of elite "technocratic liberals."
Rather than a sad listing of errors, I prefer to move to solutions.
As several pundits have started to say, all solutions for those--like us in this comments section--who favor democracy, is a return to a focus on labor and working families. For this audience, I don't need to elaborate.
What I can add is in the 1970s 1980s the Dems failed democracy by enabling unions to raise their own wages so high, they triggered the rush by corporations to outsource productions to China et al. By not regulating Labor, the Dems killed the goose who laid the golden eggs (low inflation economic prosperity). Now the same lazy Dem thinking enables millionaires and billionaires to make a monopoly out of every product and service you can think of and raise prices. But I digress.
The solution is as Bernie said yesterday to a questioner at a rally, "You lead the change. You run for office."
Corbin has it exactly right here: Start building workable-sustainable programs and fund them no matter how small you have to start.
Example: Who can replicate Habitat for Humanity's low cost starter-home house-building in your locality? The likely bottle-neck is (1) building local consensus on this, and (2) learning how to write grant proposals to pro-democracy millionaires-billionaires and their foundations.
I admire Corbin Trent's ability and discipline to write lucid, daily commentaries on U.S. politics. He fits it all together into compelling, big picture of dysfunction. What is missing is how the U.S. engages with the rest of the world. One barrier to making a great transformation is that Americans tend to believe that we always do things better and live better lives than citizens of other countries. To admit to a crisis of governance internally is inconsistent with this persistent notion of superiority. For example, we could learn a few things from China about how to end persistent poverty because they have done it with a transformative effort, but the media here have not covered it and nobody knows about it. Stereotypes about socialism vs. capitalism and democracy vs. dictatorship always get in the way of learning from the experience of others. You cannot fit China, a continuous civilization of 5,000 years, into any of these pre-defined categories. The refrain inside the Washington bubble is that "China is a threat" as well as one of several faux causes of the economic woes of working class Americans. Continuing an anachronistic cold war precludes being cooperative and collaborative and working toward mutually beneficial solutions. In order to make a complete transformation we need to make friends, not enemies, of the rest of the world and stop backing and engaging in wasteful and immoral wars of choice, as they have occurred frequently during the last 80 years. In other words, a sense of desperation at home should not lead to scapegoating and paranoia abroad.
The cost of free speech has priced the bulk of our electorate out of the market. I wouldn't mind seeing lobbying outlawed or severely restricted. It's past time for our legislators to start actually representing their district.
Republicans do a great job of putting thoughts in succinct phrases or terms -- I need the same. Uncomplicate what Democrats stand for and we might do a better job of communicating to the general public. Yes, I enjoy philosophical discussions but we must move past those!!
Very interesting piece, though I find it strange, if not ridiculous, that it never mentions the Clinton Presidency, both the good and the bad and the context in which he was initially elected in 1992.
Like how it possible to write the below paragraph, mention Ross Perot and President Obama and NOT mention President Bill Clinton, who was a very popular Democrat over two terms and did many good things, among some bad, but saw the beginning of the MAGA/wingnut crisis that now engulfs the Republic? How do you expect to be taken seriously with a paragraph like this! America didn't begin in 2008, for god sakes where everything that happened before that can be dismissed as not important to Democrats or can be summarized with a paragraph like this. It leads to false assumptions and bad advice:
"....Reagan promised a revolution—government was the problem, he'd fix it. People believed him. Then came Gingrich's Contract with America. Ross Perot's charts and plain talk. Howard Dean's outsider energy. Obama's hope and change. The Tea Party's rage. Bernie's political revolution. And now Trump—nominated three fucking times......"
Maybe go back and relearn the history of the Clinton Presidency, what it meant, where it succeeded, where it didn't, and get back to us....
Deep Purple, my guess is you lived thru the Clinton years as an adult as I did. Younger generations hardly know about Clinton years and its legacy. In my comments in this Comments section I hold Bill Clinton to task for ending the healthy New Deal Ethos.
So you know: my name covers both my musical preference (one of my favorite bands) and my politics. Yes, I was a young adult during the Clinton Presidency. I personally find most progressive dismissals of the Clinton Presidency to be too limited and detached from a historical analysis of the country and its electoral politics. Clinton didn't end the New Deal ethos as I see it. Reagan did, with Carter's help. Clinton tried to keep the best parts of the New Deal sustainable for the new world of technological advancement and globalization as I see it. His approach had strengths and weaknesses. The fact that most progressives dismiss the Clinton Administration says more about them than actual American politics as I see it. A lot to learn from it, good and bad, as I initially noted in my first comment. Pure dismissal of Clinton is silly as I see it.
Yes, clear to me what you are saying. What I note is for 2-3 years now, partly started by Matt Stoller of BIG substack, there is a re-evaluation of the corruption of both Obama's and Clinton's presidencies. The golden glow aroujd both of them is fading--and justly so. Both are "saints" to morally bankrupt elite "technocratic liberals" Corbin mentions.
Thing is: I see myself as a technocratic neoliberal! I certainly read Stoller, but he, like so many others, is quite repetitive and too marinated in his own genius (getting high on his own supply) to get much from his work beyond monopoly and corporate power is bad. I get that, fine. But some of this critique sits within a vacuum and bubble of the real World where actual things happen and where there is a need to push actual policies thru. It gets tiring. So, sure, there were downsides to Clinton and Obama, but 2008 Obama, post Chimpy W Bush/Iraq fiasco, is a WHOLE different story than 1992 Clinton era dragging the country out of the Reagan/Bush era. If Gore hadn't distanced himself from Bill, he would have won regardless of the Palm Beach butterfly ballot, and the World would be a very different place. If Bill's heart was a bit stronger and his voice was so scratchy, he could probably run tomorrow and capture maybe 51-52% of the vote with little trouble. Says something in my book. Alas, his two terms and quadruple bypass make that impossible. But just ignoring the sheer reality of 1980-1992 and the American mindset of that period is sheer lunacy in my opinion, Stoller rants against monopoly power or not.
You are basically correct. When in a position to win, she commented that "she would not change a thing" if elected. And then she wasn't.
We definitely need a working platform that addresses the needs of the bottom 50% of our Country. Fair Wages that can make America affordable again. Affordable housing. A balanced budget (for those households, and our Government) and a path to paying our debt. Equal rights for women. Responsible gun laws (like re-introducing bans on Weapons of War). Progressive taxes to fund these needs. Universal Health Care to save us all money. Bridges to the few truly inspired Democrats in office now, with a list of those that will sign on to this vision, as well as people committed to replacing the "It Ain't Broke" politicians who have resided over its rot.
I just realized that each of these topics needs a Chapter in US 2026 to discuss the actual problem, actual solutions, and revenue needed to make that happen.
Can someone explain this sentence to me?
“They're applauding as federal troops patrol D.C. streets. (With good results as it happens)”
That sure sounds like he is saying the deployment of troops ha had “good results” but maybe I’m wrong. I would hope Corbin Trent would not say something so ridiculous.
Is it even necessary to mention the troops invading blue cities has absolutely zero to do with crime?
The point of this entire piece is that there is a revolution happening both politically otherwise. Part of understanding that is realizing reality and then being able to argue against ideas in the face of that reality. The reality is that violent crime is down since the occupation of National Guard troops. That is not something that we get to debate really. So we have to accept that and then have a counter argument. That was the reason for the parenthetical addition.
The point is that the idea that the National Guard troops are there to fight crime is engaging in a false premise from the start. It is patently obvious that Trump is not deploying troops in blue cities because of crime, or immigrant protests, or for any reason other than normalizing military presence in Democratic cities (not coincidentally, run by Black mayors).
By even engaging in that utterly false idea, you are buying right into Trump’s propaganda and conceding ground that it might actually be a good thing and ignoring why they are actually there.
This also ignores so many other aspects (troops picking up trash, centered in high profile , low crime areas, doing terrible damage to local business, cities in red states with far higher crime rates, crime already trending down in DC etc).
Not to mention that, obviously, if anyone floods a city with so much military presence that people are afraid to go out, crime may drop. Hooray. Let’s arrest everyone all the time, then crime really will vanish.
Those are “good results”?
Fair, but it should be noted that crime was down in the city before the military occupation. Yes, it's down even more now that the military has taken over the city. Our counterargument to that half-baked success story is that we've lost some degree of our civil liberties as a result of the occupation. For instance, a protest monitor was arrested by the Guard on Labor Day at Union Station. He was taking a nap, because after all, the Veterans encampment is a 24/7 operation, and no one there is getting a good night's rest. The Guard claimed the monitor had graffitied the monument where he slept with chalk. I didn't see it. These sorts of accusations are all they need to pick citizens up and to be disappeared...and that's exactly what they're doing. It's a mistake for those of us on the Left to be reiterating ANY of their half-baked lies.
Of course a military occupation is likely to reduce crime. I imagine EVERYONE is reluctant to venture out! And yes, big cities (red and blue) do have more crime and I'm sure would benefit from more federal (our tax money) support for appropriate local community policing and social services!
Fair comment. I thought the same, but was willing to overlook it given the larger purpose behind the article. My interpretation: MAGA is "applauding as federal troops patrol DC streets." That's a given. The complicated prose is: "(With good results as it happens)". I'm from DC, so maybe I have some helpful perspective. They've indeed arrested over 1,000 people over the last three weeks. That's a fact. Unfortunately, most are brown and black-skinned blue-collar workers (with and without citizenship documentation), homeless, or community members of militarized neighborhoods that are defending each other. The once minority-majority city is largely vacant, eerily quiet, with only whites venturing out into the streets during the day. No doubt the way Trump wants it. And yet, you try to have a conversation with anyone Right-of-Center and they're convinced the streets are safer with armed military personnel on them. Even that Schumercrat, Mayor Bowser, is repeating the hypocrisy (in a shameless effort to get $2B from the Federal government for 'beautifican' projects). Fortunately, there's an effort afoot by Refuse Fascism to occupy and shut down DC. A mass mobilization action starting on November 5 and lasting until the regime falls. Check it here: https://refusefascism.org/category/organizing-toolkits/
Thanks - even 1000 more arrests over 3 weeks after deploying 2000+ troops doesn’t sound like much to me for a city the size of DC. So that could be seen as 2+ troops for a single arrest over that whole time frame?
And, as you say, it’s much worse when looking just a bit more closely at what they are actually doing and who they are targeting.
Hi Corbin, Just read this morning on WPR that St. John's Lutheran Church is tearing down their 1906 church in Madison, WI and rebuilding a lower level sanctuary with 10 story structure with 130 housing units, 110 of which have capped rents...available in tier to people making no more than 30, 50 or 60% of the area's median income. They hope to break ground this fall. HOPE.
Wow, a shining example of "do what you CAN do locally"
Okay, I totally agree with you and a plan to move forward by tackling what folks need differently. Here’s the problem: every day I my email and text that are filled with candidates—good ones—from all over the country, National, state and local organizations, news organizations all asking for donations. My husband and I are on a fixed income as well as many other, the paycheck to paycheck folks, the unhoused, the base of the Democratic Party. We write letters and post cards, put up signs, get folks registered to vote, sign up to drive folks to vote go to rallies, but can’t bankroll all the things we need to do. WHERE DOES THE MONEY COME FROM to fight the war chest of the oligarch has. Trump just made 5 billion dollars for goodness sake. It’s hard to believe we can pull off what we need to do to win.
We’ll never win the money race with Republicans and corporate Democrats who have access to billions of dollars, thousands of millions $. But perhaps we don’t need millions to win elections if all those good, progressive Democratic candidates, who bombard us with daily emails and texts, collaborate and run as a unified slate. If they organized themselves into a battalion, a network, a cooperative intent on taking over Congress, the presidency, and as many state and local offices as possible.
Running individually, these newcomers can be easily buried under millions of dollars of advertising by corporate Democrats or Republicans. But fire up the imaginations of voters with the vision of a progressive slate that, if elected, will work in a unified and concerted manner to really change government to be one that works to make life better for regular people.
Describe the plan to fix the nation, step by step- with concrete plans- laws and policies- not bland platitudes. Let’s give the people the detailed vision of how we’d improve health care, education, energy, banking, transportation, land management, labor policy, housing, access to healthy food and water, employment. Every candidate in the slate campaigns to elect the whole slate. Candidates share rallies, combining local with regional with national. Create huge campaign events. Create a website and social media that effectively reaches voters.
As Corbin says, if we present non-corporate choices for a pro-worker government, and elect super majorities, then we can transform the nation.
Looking forward to seeing your Contract With America. Recommend you crowd source the review and editing. Many of us have lived experience inside the Federal Civil Service that will help make it successful. This is the lesson from Project 2025 and Trump II - we have to be clear about how to use the levers of power, and what’s standing in the way.
Glad to hear you're moving forward with 'The Plan' you outlined last week. How can we help now and down the road?
I know recreating a government that actually serves the common good is a complex task, particularly for a country that's as large and diverse as ours. I think your Builder's approach is very valid. However, I feel we need a simple guiding principal. I once attended a camp where we only had one rule, and that was "To Be Considerate". It applied to everything and really worked! I would like to see a government devoid of party labels that has only one rule as a guiding principal, and I would suggest that it be some version of "The Golden Rule". Would go a long way toward fostering a government for the common good.
Agree. I also note (1 the enduring power of GH Bush's speeechwriter's phrase, "a kinder, gentle nation."
And (2) the recent meme starting from the 2025 Superman movie, "To be kind to yourself and others is the new punk" (the antidote to Rump's pro-brutality, fragile masculinity culture)
I feel strongly that the focus now should be on getting humanity tuned into the metacrisis. Until people know how we figure to go back to the Stone Age unless we do something to avert that, we’re not going to do anything to mitigate against disaster ahead. How to wise up humanity should be first on our do-do list.
My latest idea for how to get big moves to happen, without any charismatic leader showing the way, is for people like you and me to get into comments on each other, like I’m doing here, to have mini exchanges like this. If something interesting emerged, we could put it in Notes for more of the Substack world to comment on. Get the whole Substack universe buzzing with creative thinking about how to get humanity to turn away from hurting each other and turn toward saving ourselves.
Yes, an ideal evolution of this vibrant comments section is to make it into a bulletin board of local "thousands points of light" of good people building good things for worker-ownership and working families. Post projects needing more volunteers, workers and donors.
I wasn't thinking of just this space, since we're in an era where no single savior entity is the way to go. My idea is for people with real knowledge to engage in each other's Substacks so that there's buzz from everywhere.
Sue, can you please explain in this comments section what is "Notes"????????
It would be a daunting challenge for me to get beyond saying that it's the Substack version of social networking that I am far from an expert in. I suggest asking Google, since there doesn't seem to be a place on Substack to talk about its processes. I wonder why oh why there isn't a Suggestion Box.
I share your frustration that the people who hold positions of influence- elected officials, those with power and access to the microphone- seem incompetent or unwilling to take real action to stop the destruction of our democracy. Corbin suggests that thoughtful citizens collaborate and begin to compose/devise a plan for rebuilding the country, and thereafter gain support of the majority of voters to bring about real change. He appears to be willing to be the scribe for the Rebuilding America plan. He welcomes input from others and admits he alone doesn’t have all the answers. We can start writing that document here.
It sounds good to create the plan, but what Corbin sent was daunting. Too much to take in and respond to. I wonder what a process could be that would be manageable. Maybe go sequentially, one part after another?
Here is the crux of it. While I agree that the Democratic Party is probably the vehicle which is best suited to effectively address the authoritarian push, voters must establish a red line that can’t be crossed in order to get the eventual supermajorities desired for transformation. And that red line might seem counterintuitive, for it requires the withholding of votes from some, if not many, Democratic Party candidates.
That red line is never voting for any DP candidate who might be in leadership, or in line for leadership, that can be shown, via our limited transparency in campaign contribution data, to be influenced by monied interests, corporate or private.
It’s the only way to remove the rot that prevents the transformation. Vote for socialists like Ware for governor in CA, Sawant for congress in WA, or for Democrats who ‘get it’ like Platner for senate in Maine, or independents like Osborn in NE. Only vote for those who aren’t corporate-owned, and are willing to fight for working people, and maybe the Democratic Party will see the light.
No votes for people like Schumer, or Jeffries, or Biden, or Harris, or any of their protégés who display fealty to large donors at the expense of the 99%. Quit thinking you owe the Democrats your vote, even in the face of GOP lunacy. If you voted for Biden/Harris in the last election, in the face of their corporate-owned campaign, not to mention support for a damn genocide, you are part of the problem here, and just as culpable as the misguided Trump voters in abetting the authoritarian surge.
EXCELLENT, the do-it-ourselves answer to the corruption of Citizen's United.
Unfortunately, while there is some truth to old adage that all politics is local, and there are many examples of local governments endorsing many progressive policies, until we clear the systemic rot on the federal level, in all three branches, we get nowhere when it comes to fixing what ails us, from wealth inequality to the transition from an endless war economy to climate.
We have to start with building a progressive majority in the federal legislative branch. That means electing as many progressive independents, third-party candidates, and Democrats, and even the rare GOP member willing to sign on to HJR-54, in order to begin to overthrow corporate rule. Neither party is willing, currently, to nominate a presidential candidate willing to side with labor, unequivocally, and use the bully pulpit to that end.
It’s only going to happen one seat at a time. The longer liberals keep looking at this as D vs. R, and always voting for corporate-owned candidates just because of a D beside the name, the longer the rot continues, and grows.
I hate to come across as a one trick pony, but, imo, the way to keep people engaged in this fight, across multiple election cycles, is raising awareness about HJR-54 (MoveToAmend.org), explaining the critical nature of its passage as the biggest tool in the toolkit to overthrow the corporate coup, which then opens the door to progressive public policy, on every issue people care about. Every potential voter should be aware of HJR-54, actively support those candidates willing to cosponsor, refuse to vote for those who don’t, and begin to build the power of the 99% by making working people understand this can happen.
The 18yo vote amendment took less than a year to ratify. Same with this one, if we can just get it to the floor for a vote. That comes with public pressure on elected officials/candidates; the only way to flip the levers of power in our favor.
Move to Amend: End Corporate Rule:
". . . corporations have no consciences, no beliefs, no feelings, no personhood. Corporations are not “We the People” by whom and for whom our Constitution was established" ~ ~Supreme Court Justice Stevens, January 2010
https://www.movetoamend.org/
I am convinced that a revived labor movement (infused and united with the cooperative movement) is needed to lead and solidify the rebuilding and revolutionizing of the Democratic Party. This People’s Labor Movement whose determined commitment to transform dysfunctional systems which exact economic servitude to the whims and greed of oligarchs into means to truly serve the needs of the people and repudiate the subordination of labor to capital (of people to profits), must be supported and advanced as the movement coalesces around the liberating democracy of cooperative culture and economics, a movement that respects, honors and embodies our collective selves. This is the movement of solidarity which must TAKE LEAD of the Democratic Party.
Agree, Robert :) I'm curious who else of Corbin's fans knows about cooperative alternatives to corporatism? Worker-owned, worker-run biz is the likely endgame of a healed US nation. One bottleneck now is the lack of an explicit values-spiritual vision so churches can get on board.
I just checked Substack for publications on "worker run business," "worker owned" Nothing.
I know there are websites devoted to these. What this tells me is a wave of cooperative workplaces remain ten years in the future or more.
Labor and veterans.
There's one large, hidden factor that I think you might be missing. As someone who has lived in the Bible Belt my whole life, and who just wrote a book about the power of religious propaganda, I feel I need to add some context.
It's not that MAGAs are "so desperate for change that they'll embrace authoritarianism." Sure, some of them might be, but the underlying anger isn't really about economics. They will claim it is, and their propagandists will use that claim as cover, but it's bullshit. If it were really about economics, they would vote for the party offering to raise the minimum wage, eliminate student debt relief, offer cheaper (or even universal) health care, protect unions, etc.
But they never do. Why? Because they have been subjected to DECADES of propaganda, first from their religious leaders, to their AM talk radio hosts, to their favorite podcasters, to Fox News and their local Sinclair-owned TV news. The propaganda paints Democrats as, at best, clueless hippies who just want to take your "hard-earned" tax money and give it to "lazy welfare queens." At worst, and really, at the bottom of nearly all of it, they think Democrats are literally in league with Satan, intent on murdering babies, raping children, and tearing down the country. QAnon is nothing new - it's just a new spin on a lot of old conspiracy theories.
So don't fall for it. MAGAs aren't worried about their Social Security or wages, because if they were, they wouldn't keep voting for politicians who keep slashing them. They aren't embracing authoritarianism out of desperation; they were authoritarians all along.
Delani, you make a striking point, "They aren't embracing authoritarianism out of desperation; they were authoritarians all along." As one writer to another, I invite you to make this your topic sentence, add a traditional three-part thesis, then post it everywhere you can :)
Absolutely correct. I too live in the fucking Bible belt, and 90% of the population around me would happily hang me from the nearest tree if they knew I was a raging liberal democrat. That's why I'm well armed.
And Democrats do nothing to disprove the misinformation. In 2020, Biden promised to raise the minimum wage to $15/hour if elected but never did. Maybe if Democrats honored some of their campaign promises to help working people, folks in the Bible Belt would question the propaganda.
Agree! Corbin continues to be the best writer in America I know of.
What I can add is, a positive way to view Rump 2.0 to is he measures how weak US democracy has been since at least Bill Clinton. Turning away from New Deal ethos was the beginning of the end, the beginning of elite "technocratic liberals."
Rather than a sad listing of errors, I prefer to move to solutions.
As several pundits have started to say, all solutions for those--like us in this comments section--who favor democracy, is a return to a focus on labor and working families. For this audience, I don't need to elaborate.
What I can add is in the 1970s 1980s the Dems failed democracy by enabling unions to raise their own wages so high, they triggered the rush by corporations to outsource productions to China et al. By not regulating Labor, the Dems killed the goose who laid the golden eggs (low inflation economic prosperity). Now the same lazy Dem thinking enables millionaires and billionaires to make a monopoly out of every product and service you can think of and raise prices. But I digress.
The solution is as Bernie said yesterday to a questioner at a rally, "You lead the change. You run for office."
Corbin has it exactly right here: Start building workable-sustainable programs and fund them no matter how small you have to start.
Example: Who can replicate Habitat for Humanity's low cost starter-home house-building in your locality? The likely bottle-neck is (1) building local consensus on this, and (2) learning how to write grant proposals to pro-democracy millionaires-billionaires and their foundations.
Comments invited :)
I admire Corbin Trent's ability and discipline to write lucid, daily commentaries on U.S. politics. He fits it all together into compelling, big picture of dysfunction. What is missing is how the U.S. engages with the rest of the world. One barrier to making a great transformation is that Americans tend to believe that we always do things better and live better lives than citizens of other countries. To admit to a crisis of governance internally is inconsistent with this persistent notion of superiority. For example, we could learn a few things from China about how to end persistent poverty because they have done it with a transformative effort, but the media here have not covered it and nobody knows about it. Stereotypes about socialism vs. capitalism and democracy vs. dictatorship always get in the way of learning from the experience of others. You cannot fit China, a continuous civilization of 5,000 years, into any of these pre-defined categories. The refrain inside the Washington bubble is that "China is a threat" as well as one of several faux causes of the economic woes of working class Americans. Continuing an anachronistic cold war precludes being cooperative and collaborative and working toward mutually beneficial solutions. In order to make a complete transformation we need to make friends, not enemies, of the rest of the world and stop backing and engaging in wasteful and immoral wars of choice, as they have occurred frequently during the last 80 years. In other words, a sense of desperation at home should not lead to scapegoating and paranoia abroad.
The cost of free speech has priced the bulk of our electorate out of the market. I wouldn't mind seeing lobbying outlawed or severely restricted. It's past time for our legislators to start actually representing their district.
Republicans do a great job of putting thoughts in succinct phrases or terms -- I need the same. Uncomplicate what Democrats stand for and we might do a better job of communicating to the general public. Yes, I enjoy philosophical discussions but we must move past those!!
Very interesting piece, though I find it strange, if not ridiculous, that it never mentions the Clinton Presidency, both the good and the bad and the context in which he was initially elected in 1992.
Like how it possible to write the below paragraph, mention Ross Perot and President Obama and NOT mention President Bill Clinton, who was a very popular Democrat over two terms and did many good things, among some bad, but saw the beginning of the MAGA/wingnut crisis that now engulfs the Republic? How do you expect to be taken seriously with a paragraph like this! America didn't begin in 2008, for god sakes where everything that happened before that can be dismissed as not important to Democrats or can be summarized with a paragraph like this. It leads to false assumptions and bad advice:
"....Reagan promised a revolution—government was the problem, he'd fix it. People believed him. Then came Gingrich's Contract with America. Ross Perot's charts and plain talk. Howard Dean's outsider energy. Obama's hope and change. The Tea Party's rage. Bernie's political revolution. And now Trump—nominated three fucking times......"
Maybe go back and relearn the history of the Clinton Presidency, what it meant, where it succeeded, where it didn't, and get back to us....
Deep Purple, my guess is you lived thru the Clinton years as an adult as I did. Younger generations hardly know about Clinton years and its legacy. In my comments in this Comments section I hold Bill Clinton to task for ending the healthy New Deal Ethos.
So you know: my name covers both my musical preference (one of my favorite bands) and my politics. Yes, I was a young adult during the Clinton Presidency. I personally find most progressive dismissals of the Clinton Presidency to be too limited and detached from a historical analysis of the country and its electoral politics. Clinton didn't end the New Deal ethos as I see it. Reagan did, with Carter's help. Clinton tried to keep the best parts of the New Deal sustainable for the new world of technological advancement and globalization as I see it. His approach had strengths and weaknesses. The fact that most progressives dismiss the Clinton Administration says more about them than actual American politics as I see it. A lot to learn from it, good and bad, as I initially noted in my first comment. Pure dismissal of Clinton is silly as I see it.
Yes, clear to me what you are saying. What I note is for 2-3 years now, partly started by Matt Stoller of BIG substack, there is a re-evaluation of the corruption of both Obama's and Clinton's presidencies. The golden glow aroujd both of them is fading--and justly so. Both are "saints" to morally bankrupt elite "technocratic liberals" Corbin mentions.
Thing is: I see myself as a technocratic neoliberal! I certainly read Stoller, but he, like so many others, is quite repetitive and too marinated in his own genius (getting high on his own supply) to get much from his work beyond monopoly and corporate power is bad. I get that, fine. But some of this critique sits within a vacuum and bubble of the real World where actual things happen and where there is a need to push actual policies thru. It gets tiring. So, sure, there were downsides to Clinton and Obama, but 2008 Obama, post Chimpy W Bush/Iraq fiasco, is a WHOLE different story than 1992 Clinton era dragging the country out of the Reagan/Bush era. If Gore hadn't distanced himself from Bill, he would have won regardless of the Palm Beach butterfly ballot, and the World would be a very different place. If Bill's heart was a bit stronger and his voice was so scratchy, he could probably run tomorrow and capture maybe 51-52% of the vote with little trouble. Says something in my book. Alas, his two terms and quadruple bypass make that impossible. But just ignoring the sheer reality of 1980-1992 and the American mindset of that period is sheer lunacy in my opinion, Stoller rants against monopoly power or not.
You are basically correct. When in a position to win, she commented that "she would not change a thing" if elected. And then she wasn't.
We definitely need a working platform that addresses the needs of the bottom 50% of our Country. Fair Wages that can make America affordable again. Affordable housing. A balanced budget (for those households, and our Government) and a path to paying our debt. Equal rights for women. Responsible gun laws (like re-introducing bans on Weapons of War). Progressive taxes to fund these needs. Universal Health Care to save us all money. Bridges to the few truly inspired Democrats in office now, with a list of those that will sign on to this vision, as well as people committed to replacing the "It Ain't Broke" politicians who have resided over its rot.
I just realized that each of these topics needs a Chapter in US 2026 to discuss the actual problem, actual solutions, and revenue needed to make that happen.