Any idea of an cross class people’s coalition against Trump and Trumpism that doesn’t include the Democratic Party (as a whole) shouldn’t be taken seriously, because it isn’t serious. It’s playing at politics, not soberly understanding and practicing politics of this moment.

In a letter to a friend in June, I wrote, “I do believe that the outcome in November will have major consequences, but don’t think it will seal the fate of the country going forward. The larger socio-economic environment is too unstable and unpredictable to allow that conclusion. Right now it feels like the energy is on the other side.”

I was probably right then, but I am wrong now.

Here’s why: the combination of the superbly crafted congressional hearings on the Jan 6 insurrection, Biden’s legislative achievements, falling gas prices, poor candidate selection on the Republican side, the discovery of national security documents at Trump’s beach house, and a rising majoritarian anxiety over the relentless assault on democracy, orchestrated by the MAGA movement and the Republican Party, has evaporated the Republican/MAGA enthusiasm advantage. So much so that it’s within reach for the Democrats to retain control of the House and Senate in November.

Moreover, to this shifting landscape, we would have to add the outpouring of national outrage – Kansas and elsewhere – at the decision of the conservative majority on the Supreme Court to overturn Roe v Wade and at the conservative court’s sponsor – the GOP.

Needless to say, the securing of a Democratic congressional majority will give our democracy some breathing space, thereby positioning the Biden administration and Congressional Democrats – and the coalition that supports them – to continue to make a difference in the lives of tens of millions, win new allies, and deepen democracy and democratic safeguards.

Of course, we should know from experience that such an outcome will take a massive cross class mobilization of anti-Maga voters – Democratic, Independent, Republican – between now and election day. Nothing less will win the day or the future. Any thought that we can slay the dragon of Trumpism – a dragon that has demonstrated by word and deed its readiness to expunge democracy by any means necessary – without electing a Democratic majority in both chambers is the worse kind of nonsense and demagogy.

Said another way, the election of Democratic majorities up and down the ballot is the overarching task of this moment, a necessary prerequisite to defeating Trump and Trumpism and bending the arc of justice toward democracy, equality, justice, and planetary sufficiency.

Can we do it? I would like to think so, but we’ll see.

President Biden vigorously placed the existential challenge to democracy and democratic rights, to the rule of law and equality, to one person one vote, and to favoring the few at the expense of the many before the American people last night. It was a speech that spoke to this dire moment in our country’s life. He called out authoritarian-fascist-racist extremists – Trump, Maga supporters, sections of the Republican Party, election deniers, thugs, and more – that are busy NOW attempting to expunge democratic rule and everything else that is decent and just in our national life.

It was, in my opinion, his best speech ever, although I do wonder – weirdly enough – if he gave enough emphasis to the urgency of voting in November. That said, I suspect it played well in swing districts.

Lastly, it was a call for the rest of us that hold democracy, equality, planetary sustainability, and social progress dear to find a niche – big or small – to assist in the mobilization of voters and elect Democrats to Congress this fall.

Biden’s decision to forgive a portion of student debt should defended as well as welcomed. It’s not enough to say, “Good start, Joe. But not enough. Let’s now move to forgive all student debt.” Sounds good, I suppose, but isn’t the more immediate challenge to counter the vicious attacks from the MAGA crowd and the Republican Party to Biden’s announcement.

And we can begin by reminding voters that the executive order will relieve some of the unconscionable debt burden that struggling working class students and their families, Republican, Independent, and Democrat, pile up, while attending college. We should also remind voters that President Trump and the GOP majority in Congress had no hesitation in handing out trillions of dollars in tax cuts to the wealthiest families and corporations in the country. For doing what – nothing!

In these circumstances, simply upping the ante and insisting on full debt relief is in some ways a cop out. It side steps the main ground on which Trump and the MAGA crowd are making their fight against Biden’s executive order lowering student debt relief.

Reading the obituary of Mikhail Gorbachev in the NYT yesterday reminded me of how exciting it was when Gorbachev, the newly elected General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, stepped on the international stage. In contrast to his earlier predecessors, he was full of energy, unscripted, and relatively young. He offered fresh ideas to democratize and restructure socialism, while unapologetically rejecting dogma, wrapped up in the language of Marxism Leninism.

He also challenged the logic of the Cold War, insisting on the existential imperative of peace and disarmament and an end to political blocs. “Nuclear war,” he said, ” should never be fought and can never be won.”He didn’t achieve his goals, but I attach the main responsibilty for this failure – less to Gorbachev – and more to the the dogmatic and self serving resistance of much of the Soviet Party leadership at various levels to social renovation and democratization, not to mention U.S. leaders who were resolute in their determination to “win” the Cold Wa

At the time of the implosion of the Soviet Union, I didn’t think along these lines. But it wasn’t too long after that world shaking event (and the bitter split in the Communist Party here in December 1991) that I began a rethink of the Soviet experience, marxism, and the party’s politics, culture, and history.

If I were asked to sum up what conclusions I reached it would be this: our theory – Marxism-Leninism – was too rigid and formulaic, our analysis too loaded with questionable assumptions and wishful thinking, our methodology too undialectical, our structure hyper centralized, and our politics drifting from political realities. Thus, standing in place didn’t seem like a viable option. Not everyone agreed, but that is another story for another time.