You say you want a revolution…

John Lennon went on to say

Well, you know
We all want to change the world.

It doesn’t appear that he was right. A more accurate observation would appear to be that we want the world to change, but we don’t necessarily want to change it.

Bernie Sanders started a political revolution in the US.  He generated a lot of excitement about his long-supported themes that are important to the working class and poor, which includes almost all of us. He attracted unprecedented support, both in attendance at rallies and functions and in campaign contributions, attesting to the popularity of his ideas.

Bernie put a huge effort into the campaign, following a schedule that would be arduous for people 20 years his junior. Throughout the effort, he repeated the admonition that he was in the race to win, but the revolution is about much more than a candidate, an office, or a race. He repeatedly stated that change comes from the bottom up, not the top down.

Bernie Sanders and his revolution took on what is arguably the most powerful political machine in American history. Almost predictably, he did not win the Democratic presidential nomination. Almost predictably, the Democratic party and the establishment it represents had to resort to cheating, dirty politics, and treachery to make the failure happen.

Among the party’s methods to prevent Sanders’ successful campaign were the superdelegates. Regardless of the overwhelming voter support for Sanders, the Washington superdelegates virtually unanimously supported Clinton, including with their votes at the Democratic National Convention in July. In Washington, Bernie Sanders supporters vociferously called for the superdelegates to follow the will of the voters.

They didn’t, and nothing came of it.

Accepting the defeat about which he could do nothing, he turned the spotlight over to Hillary Clinton, the only viable strategy at the time, but continued supporting the revolution and the ground-up strategy he promoted throughout his campaign. He advised those wanting our political system to change to change it themselves, starting with running for local and state offices, putting the beginnings of political power into the progressive movement.

How is that working out?

Washington State is a good example. In the Washington State Democratic caucuses of 2016, Bernie received 72.7% of the vote. However, that was 72.7% of the 28% of the voters who bothered to participate, or 20.4% of Washington voters.

Some excuse the low turnout with the inconvenience of the Democratic caucus system. That may be the case, but let’s look further.

In August, Washington State held the primary for all offices except President. In the Washington State primary, all candidates for an office are listed as running for that office, regardless of party affiliation. Voters may choose any one of them. The two candidates with the highest vote count, regardless of party, go on to the general election. It is possible to have a general election race between two Republicans, two Democrats, two Independents, etc.

The candidates for the various offices included the Democratic incumbents and several progressive candidates, many of whom were endorsed by the Bernie Sanders campaign. One might say that these people were the start of Bernie’s political revolution.

One might also say that the revolution was stillborn. The positions of seven of the superdelegates that supported Clinton were on the ballot. There were Berniecrat progressive challengers for all but one of those positions. Voter turnout was 34%. All of the superdelegates that supported Clinton retained their positions. In most cases, they won by large margins. That doesn’t sound like much of a revolution.

The lack of interest is made more concerning by the ease of registering and voting in Washington. Registering and voting in Washington are both simple. Washington does not have obstructive voter procedures or requirements. Voter registration can be done on line, by mail, or at any state office. There are no polling places in Washington. Ballots and a publication containing statements from all candidates are mailed to voters well in advance of the election. The ballots may be returned by mail or deposited in any of the many conveniently located collection boxes.

This makes Washington an interesting test of the political will of folks who say they want a revolution. The revolution doesn’t require pitchforks or guns. It doesn’t involve danger or even any substantial inconvenience. Yet, the vast majority do not bother participating.

Perhaps the majority of the population is not as much complacent as it is ignorant of the fact that electing a president changes almost nothing. Maybe they don’t realize that the president is 0.18% of the US government and it will take a lot more than a progressive president to change anything. That information is not difficult to find. Anyone who has graduated from high school should know it. Perhaps the ignorance of the workings of the government is merely another form of complacency.

Bernie didn’t mention all of the elements of the revolution. It should not have been necessary to do so. Yes, progressive-minded people need to run for any and all public offices, starting to staff American politics with the people who will eventually break the corrupt system controlling the country. 41 candidates took the challenge in one state, Washington. However, it takes more than candidates. The candidates need votes in sufficient quantity to win their races.

It appears that we don’t want to change the world; we want it to change by itself while we wait impatiently. That probably won’t happen.

HW