In early February, when
the opinions editor of USA Today, a centrist
newspaper, described the 2020 US presidential election as ‘existential’, she
was referring to its importance to the Democratic Party. It may be existential,
period. Another four years with Donald Trump as president and the planet may be
at tipping point.
Meanwhile, the
candidate who presents the starkest contrast to his agenda is being attacked by
centrist and progressive (so-called) elements of the establishment. The same USA Today article made reference
to Bernie Sanders’ age and health, and noted that the ‘campaign against
socialism is in full swing’. Which, indeed, it is.
For good measure, the
piece quoted President Trump: “We will never let socialism destroy American
health care.” American health care is not known for its accessibility, nor
affordability. Universal health care, such as that we have enjoyed in Australia
since Whitlam, has come to represent the socialist devil.
One week earlier, the Washington Post
deployed a
Murdoch-style attack on Sanders. Supposedly a bastion of progressive
commentary, the Post disparaged Sanders’
choice of clothes, his hair, his alleged decrepitude. The establishment does
not see Sanders as one of their own, and would like him gone.
The business community is even more concerned. Fellow Democrat candidates Joe Bieden, Amy Klobuchar and Pete Buttigieg (the latter two having this week endorsed Biden after pulling their campaigns) each receive donations for their campaign funding from at least five CEOs of top 500 S&P companies. Sanders does not receive donations from any CEO representing companies in this elite group. He has, however, received more contributions than any other candidate: US$34 million in the final quarter of 2019.
Unlike his opponents,
though, Sanders is reliant upon the support of large numbers of people, giving
more modest sums. Over half a million people have contributed financially. If
Sanders wins, they won’t be expecting favours, but simply expect that his
policies will enhance their wellbeing and bring greater opportunity.
The collective
determination of the American establishment to exclude a candidate whose
program poses a threat to the interests of the elite, as the tipping point
rapidly approaches, is cause for grave concern. Does Sanders represent so great
a threat to American democracy that it overwhelms threats of a truly existential
nature?
Sanders is not the
only candidate who offers hope. Others, especially Elizabeth Warren, have
attractive elements in their programs. It would be possible to randomly select
anyone, elect them President of the Unites States, and be sure they would pose
less of a threat to humanity than the incumbent.
President Donald Trump
acknowledges the threat of global warming. He just doesn’t appear to care.
Meanwhile, as we walk hand-in-hand into the fire, the American establishment
remains focused on eliminating Sanders. As night follows day, many Australian
commentators are falling into line.
It is unclear whether
this is because most Australian and American journalists answer to the same
master, or whether cultural propinquity leads us to the same assumptions.
But anything that
draws attention to these events is positive, as the presidential election that
will take place this November will be very important. Its effects could be
irreversible. Its impact will be global.
As an Australian, I am
following events closely. As a father, I am very concerned.
Get the latest from The Adelaide Review in your inbox
Get the latest from The Adelaide Review in your inbox