I'm no VA native, but I'd argue against this for the same reason it is a mistake to write off "red states" in the south as being barren pits of reaction. Even if the electoral prospects are poor, these states are full of abused proletarians who are even more in need of socialist politics than the comfortable "blue" states where "progressive" politics stands a better chance of positive electoral outcomes.
The expanding D.C. metropolis is turning shitlibs into the dominant political force in VA, but VA is a rather large state with a lot of rural and mountainous territory, it isn't all D.C. suburbs. It isn't like there's a line between West Virginia and Virginia where it suddenly shifts from Appalachian poverty to suburban decadence. Winning an election isn't the point. Climbing the hierarchy of the bourgeois state is a bonus which runs perpendicular to our goals. The point is to advance class struggle and ultimately topple the state.
You're right about the demographic differences in VA, but the rural folks in VA know who he is and hate him. The idea that pure class politics can win over poor rural whites is naive, and also most people in those rural communities aren't living in poverty. Most of them live pretty middle class existences and the rate of property ownership is very high even among the lower strata of the working class. Poverty definitely exists there but it is overstated. Also, reactionary cultural hegemony in rural areas has destroyed prospects for left wing radicalization in these poor communities. I do think it's worth taking the long path and trying to insert leftist ideas there even if it's fruitless for a long time though. Abandoning them will cause a solidification of reactionary beliefs like we have now.
Carter's domestic base of support is working class immigrants, black folks and downwardly mobile college-age whites. If he runs, I think there is zero chance he wins but it wouldn't hurt anyone to get him out there proselytizing, as long as the left doesn't put all their energy behind him.
I think you're right about the rural proletariat. These folks have been abandoned by the Democratic Party for so long that they have been inculcated by the right to see the left as a financial and cultural elite which offers them no solutions aside from smugly telling them to "learn to code" while fawning over grifters like J.D. Vance who blame the struggles rural Americans on their own cultural and moralistic failings. Winning these people over is not something which can be accomplished by an election, nor any political project spanning the lifetime of an electoral campaign. It is going to require a long term struggle. It is going to require the growth of an entire counterculture. I believe a key part of this though will be in distinguishing ourselves from the liberalism which passes for left politics in this country. There needs to be an alternate mode of opposition to the status quo from the knee-jerk reaction offered by the right.
That is what makes this tough though, because running as Democrats in the long run will only tie us closer to this absolute failure of a party. In general I wouldn't view supporting Democratic campaigns as a productive way of converting people to the left. If we win, the party still holds so much sway throughout the legislature and media that they can tarnish and co-opt any of our leaders. On the other hand, the ability to go out campaigning with the message that "no, these people are shit too" and build towards a true alternative can be useful. We're at a crossroads where it is really about time we had our own party and cut ties to the Democrats completely.
I'm no VA native, but I'd argue against this for the same reason it is a mistake to write off "red states" in the south as being barren pits of reaction. Even if the electoral prospects are poor, these states are full of abused proletarians who are even more in need of socialist politics than the comfortable "blue" states where "progressive" politics stands a better chance of positive electoral outcomes.
The expanding D.C. metropolis is turning shitlibs into the dominant political force in VA, but VA is a rather large state with a lot of rural and mountainous territory, it isn't all D.C. suburbs. It isn't like there's a line between West Virginia and Virginia where it suddenly shifts from Appalachian poverty to suburban decadence. Winning an election isn't the point. Climbing the hierarchy of the bourgeois state is a bonus which runs perpendicular to our goals. The point is to advance class struggle and ultimately topple the state.
You're right about the demographic differences in VA, but the rural folks in VA know who he is and hate him. The idea that pure class politics can win over poor rural whites is naive, and also most people in those rural communities aren't living in poverty. Most of them live pretty middle class existences and the rate of property ownership is very high even among the lower strata of the working class. Poverty definitely exists there but it is overstated. Also, reactionary cultural hegemony in rural areas has destroyed prospects for left wing radicalization in these poor communities. I do think it's worth taking the long path and trying to insert leftist ideas there even if it's fruitless for a long time though. Abandoning them will cause a solidification of reactionary beliefs like we have now.
Carter's domestic base of support is working class immigrants, black folks and downwardly mobile college-age whites. If he runs, I think there is zero chance he wins but it wouldn't hurt anyone to get him out there proselytizing, as long as the left doesn't put all their energy behind him.
This sounds good to me.
I think you're right about the rural proletariat. These folks have been abandoned by the Democratic Party for so long that they have been inculcated by the right to see the left as a financial and cultural elite which offers them no solutions aside from smugly telling them to "learn to code" while fawning over grifters like J.D. Vance who blame the struggles rural Americans on their own cultural and moralistic failings. Winning these people over is not something which can be accomplished by an election, nor any political project spanning the lifetime of an electoral campaign. It is going to require a long term struggle. It is going to require the growth of an entire counterculture. I believe a key part of this though will be in distinguishing ourselves from the liberalism which passes for left politics in this country. There needs to be an alternate mode of opposition to the status quo from the knee-jerk reaction offered by the right.
That is what makes this tough though, because running as Democrats in the long run will only tie us closer to this absolute failure of a party. In general I wouldn't view supporting Democratic campaigns as a productive way of converting people to the left. If we win, the party still holds so much sway throughout the legislature and media that they can tarnish and co-opt any of our leaders. On the other hand, the ability to go out campaigning with the message that "no, these people are shit too" and build towards a true alternative can be useful. We're at a crossroads where it is really about time we had our own party and cut ties to the Democrats completely.