Actual Socialists Divided over Bernie

Apparently Bernie is a SINO — Socialist In Name Only —according to those folks.

The rise of Sanders has triggered an ideological argument — is Sanders promoting bona fide socialism or, as Fredrik deBoer suggested in POLITICO Magazine last year, is he nothing but a “Socialist In Name Only?” — but the real divisions are tactical. In a presidential election year, even socialists have to think about electoral strategy. And Bernie’s rapid ascent means that the political decisions of the far-far left have been complicated by an unfamiliar surge of attention.

Some welcome it. Philip Locker, Seattle-based spokesman for the national Socialist Alternative organization, is thrilled by Sanders phenomenon, enthusing that “the political system is starting to be shaken” as Sanders “is popularizing socialism to an audience of tens of millions.”

To others, that’s dangerous naiveté. Howie Hawkins, a Green Party co-founder and member of the socialist group Solidarity, wrote an essay in May for the ISO’s Socialist Worker website attacking Sanders for “violating the first principle of socialist politics: class independence,” consorting with the “billionaire class” by pledging to “support their candidate” if he loses the Democratic primary.

Dude, this is the best press your ideology has gotten since Bob LaFollete, and you want to miss out on it? Whatevs.

That said, I do have to agree that it’s a bit incongruous for Bernie to pledge to support Clinton. Ron Paul famously declined to endorse Romney, after all. You tend to lose your mojo for being a fiercely independent politician devoted to principle when you start cavorting with the Clintons. N’est-ce pas?