>I don't see how it's ultraleftist to ask if labor is getting a good return
>on the hundreds of millions it gives Dems. It's a very hardheaded question,
>I think. Politics doesn't come any more practical than this. Who else who's
>vaguely on the right side has that much money & that many people to throw
>around?
----------------------------------------
It's not ultraleft, and it's a legitimate question to pose, and it's one you
could probably also ask in relation to the union-supported British Labour
Party and other social democratic parties abroad. But you already know the
answer: these are only political choices currently available to the unions,
and to all of the social movements for that matter. The other potential
governing parties are to the right of these liberal parties, and there are
no mass parties of any consequence to their left, and won't be any, I would
argue, short of a social crisis. It will take more than the good ideas and
energy of the current left to bring about change.
Meanwhile, you might persuade one or two frustrated unions to abandon political action altogether and to spend their PAC money on extraparliamentary campaigns and organizing, but it's unlikely they would be able to abstain for very long given all of the political decisions which affect the working conditions and living standards of their members. The unions and social movements learned early that they need sympathetic legislators and regulators and judges to defend and advance their rights - these days, mostly to defend them - so they're inevitably compelled to raise political action money on behalf of the liberal parties against the conservative ones, even through clenched teeth. Unions who withdraw their support from the Democrats, if they don't abstain, become "Gomperists" who look for sympathetic Republican candidates, who are rarely more progressive than their counterparts on the Democratic side.
Alternatively, you might persuade one or two unions to try and elect a Green, but I don't think it's realistic to expect the majority of unions to back a Green in places where the Democrats are strong because they will worry about splitting the progressive vote, or to run a Green in places where the Republicans are strong where they think it will be futile. I suppose you could work for the election of Greens at lower levels, where party allegiances aren't as strong, or hope you can get a sympathetic Green or Socialist congressman like Bernie Sanders elected nationally, but I don't think this will have much impact on the big national political issues facing the movements and you will soon have parts of the left complaining that they too are "selling out" under the pressure of the system.
In general, I think the most relevant thing to do is to join or otherwise support the union and other social movement activists in their struggles to get these parties to advance the demands of their movements. In a social crisis, those who do so will be better positioned, IMO, to lead them forward if their leaders falter than those who don't.