Trump endorsed Pelosi for Speaker of the House. So did progressive Democrats.

This is the fate of progressives in a neoliberal party.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Pramila Jayapal, and Ro Khanna are a few progressives to recently enter the Democratic Party. They are part of the “political revolution” wing of the party. They are the “Justice Democrats,” endorsed and supported by organizations that advocate for Bernie’s political revolution.

Barbara Lee, as well, is considered a progressive in the Democratic Party. She was the only member of Congress to vote against the Authorization of Use of Military Force (AUMF) during the Bush administration, which handed unprecedented war powers to the executive branch in the wake of 9/11. This proved to be a courageous and prescient vote. So, she is admired by progressives on this alone.

As Democrats regained control of the House of Representatives in the 2018 mid-terms, a new “Speaker of the House” would have to be chosen for the Democrats. We knew most Democratic officials would probably go for Nancy Pelosi, the “master tactician,” which in the Democratic Party actually means “master fundraiser from corporations.”

Progressives hoped that there would at least be resistance among the progressive wing of the party, including from the Justice Democrats. Progressives mounted a social media campaign, #BarbaraLeeForSpeaker, including an online petition to the Democratic Party establishment.

On her first day in Congress, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez did a wonderful thing. She lead a sit-in over climate change in Pelosi’s office. As she challenged Pelosi on this ground, however —that same day she said in an interview that she “admires Nancy Pelosi and her activism.” Later, she endorsed Pelosi for Speaker of the House, saying that she is “the most progressive option” in the running.

If Ocasio-Cortez must capitulate to endorse Pelosi, truly the party is rigged. Nancy Pelosi, apparently, is as good as it gets.

“Justice Democrat” Ro Khanna also recently said that he “admires Nancy Pelosi a lot and supported her openly.” Pramila Jayapal, another Justice Democrat, endorsed Pelosi for speaker too, saying that we need someone “strong, smart, and strategic.” Justice Democrat Jayapal, in her own words, “looks forward to working with [Pelosi] in the next Congress to advance our commitment to progressive policies that fueled our historic victories.”

Finally — Barbara Lee, who progressives advocated on social media in a campaign #BarbaraLeeForSpeaker… endorsed Nancy Pelosi:

“A letter circulating among female Democratic lawmakers pledges to support Pelosi’s Speaker bid in both the private ballot within the caucus later this month, and on the House floor early next year. Organized by Rep. Nita Lowey (D-N.Y.), one of Pelosi’s closest allies, it has won more than 60 signatures, including a number of lawmakers who were previously thought to be on the fence…

“…The letter’s signatories also include 17 members of the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC), including Reps. Karen Bass (Calif.), Maxine Waters (Calif.), Sheila Jackson Lee (Texas), Gwen Moore (Wis.) and Barbara Lee (Calif.).”

The point is not that Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, for example, is a bad person, or that she’s as bad as the rest of Congress. Almost surely, she is “progressive” at heart. The point, however, is that the Democratic Party is not progressive — and cannot be progressive.

There are very clear limits to how “progressive” you can be in a party that is overwhelmingly against progressives, and progressive legislation.

Any real advocate for progress knows that Nancy Pelosi is a barrier to political progress, not a catalyst for it. Pelosi is not a “master strategist” — if the goal is “progress,” or a “political revolution.”

When you see it from a different angle, though, it starts to make sense. Nancy Pelosi is a master strategist if her job is actually to thwart progress and stop the left.

From this point of view, Nancy Pelosi really is good at her job. A brilliant, master tactician. It is the job of the Democratic Party, though, not just Nancy Pelosi, to stop the left. And “compromise,” of course, with the far right!

It is the job of Democrats to stop progressive change, not create it. And it is the job of the Democratic Party to dissolve political revolutions, not support them.

It still leaves the question somewhat open: why do these “Justice Democrats,” the good progressive Democrats, the political-revolution insurgents — also say that Pelosi is good? Not just for fundraising… but for “progress” and “progressive legislation”?

Why do these progressive, political revolutionaries either give her a subtle nod to progressive-ness, or go so far as a ringing endorsement?

The reason, again, is not that the candidates themselves are bad, rather, it’s what we’ve been saying all along, that the Democratic Party is not just a ballot line — it is a machine that absorbs progressive energy, and diverts political revolutions. And it is very good at what it does.

That is what the Democratic Party has always done, and it is what the institution is set up to always do. (See: A Critical History of the Democratic Party.)

The establishment is the party. It’s unlikely that will ever change. A legal, democratic takeover of the party is simply not in the cards because the Democratic “establishment” controls the laws, and the party is not actually “democratic.” It is a dynasty party, like a new monarchy. Kings and Queens do not hand their power to peons. To make way in the kingdom, you must bend the knee to the monarchs. Or in our case, the oligarchs.

So… if you’re looking for a political revolution, reforming the Democratic Party is not it. The Democratic Party has shown over and over again that it cannot be taken over. It has shown us how it systematically transforms progressives into lukewarm moderates. Therefore, if we want change through political parties, we must build a new party.

Almost all of Bernie’s “political revolution” went into reforming this counter-revolutionary party. Most of the progressives who have made it into office — only a few of which were at the federal level — have been forced to fall in line with the establishment.

If candidates are progressive before going into the party, and then defanged shortly thereafter, imagine what we could do in a party that does not force that negative transformation! A party “establishment” that is actually on our side?

With our demands unencumbered by establishment hurdles, no longer bending to absurd rules and procedures, no longer losing most of our progressive candidates and energy to the oligarchic labyrinths… we can do so much better.

Progressives could be progressives. We could be ourselves. Democratic ideals could finally be respected. We could really fight for what we believe in! We could rubber stamp social movements, rather than stamp them out.

Before the Democratic Party becomes a “progressive” party, we’ll reach the age of the water wars. Cities are already sinking, states are already burning. Millions are fleeing their homelands, and it will only get worse under the Democratic Party’s watch. That’s how important it is to build an alternative now.