The following statement was approved by the National Committee of Socialist Alternative on December 11 and updated slightly later in December 2017.

Given that this statement has to cover a lot of ground in a relatively short space, it needs to be supplemented by reviewing other recent material we have produced including our recent articles on “ How We Can Drive Out Trump ” and on the #MeToo revolt .

It is one year since the election of the odious Trump, an event which radically changed the political landscape in this country. This document will begin with a review of some of the key features of the new situation and how the perspectives which we put forward at the end of 2016 and early 2017 have been largely confirmed. But the main purpose is to map out the variants for how the struggle against Trump and the Republican agenda could re-emerge from its current lull and the key features of political developments in the build up to the midterm elections in 2018.

Section 1 – Reviewing One Year of Trump

The bumbling incompetence of Trump was shown in his firing of FBI director Comey. This led to the appointment of Robert Mueller as special counsel which suddenly made “Russiagate” a much more real threat to his presidency. It cannot be excluded that Trump will try to get out of his difficulties at some stage by firing Mueller which would be reminiscent of Nixon’s desperate “Saturday night massacre” when he fired special prosecutor Archibald Cox. This would provoke a constitutional crisis. Depending on the revelations from Mueller, Trump could be forced out even in advance of the 2018 midterm elections, though it remains more likely that Trump will survive for a while longer, even if increasingly damaged. One way or another the enormous volatility created by the Trump regime will continue.

From the start we stressed the deeply reactionary but also chaotic quality of the Trump regime, as well as its very real authoritarian streak. All of these features have been confirmed over and over. Trump’s vicious and pathetic attacks on critics like the mayor of San Juan, Puerto Rico and those standing up against oppression like football players “taking a knee,” not to mention his defense of the “very fine people” among the white supremacist in Charlottesville will not soon be forgotten. We must also not forget that Trump was the most unpopular major party candidate in modern history who lost the popular vote by nearly three million. His popularity ratings have been dismal since taking office.

Trump and the Crisis of Capitalism

But there is an underlying danger in the situation: if a real mass movement centered on the social power of the working class is not built in the next period the space for the far right and even fascist forces, still numerically weak, can grow significantly. This is partly because the Democratic Party, even if it begins winning elections again, will not solve any of the key issues facing the working class.

There is also a generalized opposition to the Trump regime among tens of millions. There is a growing level of support for impeachment (up to 49% in a Public Policy Polling survey in late October). Four million (as of early January) have signed Democratic billionaire Tom Steyer’s petition calling for impeachment.

In December, Trump’s unpopularity reached a new low with a Monmouth University poll in early December showing 32% approval and 56% disapproval. Other polls show a drop of support among evangelical Christians and Fox News viewers. The key factor in this further drop in Trump’s support, especially among women, is the reemergence of allegations of sexual harassment and assault against Trump as well as his support for the predator Roy Moore.

This is a contradictory reality. Until recently, Trump’s core base has actually hardened in its support for him, seeing the attacks of the liberal media as confirmation that he is fighting on their behalf. It will take big developments a mass movement showing a way forward for the whole working class or serious economic crisis finally exposing the lie that he will be bring jobs back to lead to a more decisive collapse of his support. But it is also clear that most of the population rejects Trump’s racism and misogyny and sees the vicious cruelty of the Republican agenda for what it is. If anything there is now greater support for measures like Medicare for All than even a year ago. This is partly a reaction to the viciousness of Trump and the Republicans’ proposals.

The political polarization of the country has reached unprecedented levels. In the past few years we said that American society was broadly moving to the left, as evidenced by growing support for taxing the rich, single payer health care, a $15 minimum wage as well as progressive social measures like marriage equality. But does Trump’s victory – which provided cover for the emergence of white supremacists and nativists – show that society is now moving to the right? In a general sense no; what it has meant is a radicalization both on the left and the right.

In all the endless talk of who is to blame for the rise of Trump, it is crystal clear that the blame for the rise of right populism lies first and foremost with the Democratic Party itself. But one year of Trump and the emboldening of the far right also underlines the serious mistake Sanders made in not continuing to run after his campaign was blocked in the Democratic primary.

Trump pretended to speak for the “forgotten men and women” while pushing overt racism, sexism, and nativism. Tragically the other main choice on the ballot last year was Hillary Clinton who epitomizes the corruption of corporate politics. But there was another choice in 2016, namely the pro-working-class program put forward in Bernie Sanders’ campaign which was then blocked by the Democratic Party establishment. Donna Brazile’s new book has confirmed that the Democratic National Committee was essentially a subsidiary of Hillary’s campaign from the word go.

It bears repeating that Trump’s ascendancy is both a byproduct and a further cause of the degeneration and decline of American capitalism. Since 2008, the social crisis facing large sections of the working class – after decades of a one sided class war which led to unprecedented inequality – has become much worse. There is a complete rejection of the political establishment and a profound discrediting of the institutions of capitalism – with the possible exception of the military.

Trump and the Ruling Class

The same can be said for the Trump administration’s insane policy on climate change including pulling out of the Paris accord and appointing anti-science quacks to key positions. Trump has ripped up environmental regulation in the name of bringing back the coal industry which is a fool’s errand. But ordinary people in the U.S. can see that extreme weather and devastating hurricanes are on the increase, much of this due to climate change. Trump’s policies are laying the ground for an even more decisive rejection of the climate change deniers.

Under Trump, the U.S. has engaged in saber rattling against North Korea and has ramped up military intervention in the Middle East. Trump inherited Obama’s low-key militarism which by the end of his administration included bombing campaigns in up to seven countries in 2016. Trump has ramped things up a notch and let the generals off the leash. The world is right to fear that war on the Korean peninsula – with almost unimaginable consequences – is a real, if still unlikely, possibility. Now Trump is giving the green light to the Saudis to step up their regional conflict with Iran which also threatens to trigger full scale war at some stage. Both in the Middle East and East Asia, Trump’s incoherent policy is deepening the decline of U.S. power while contributing to potential disaster for ordinary people.

Another section of the elite has from the start been more focused on the damage that Trump would do to the standing of U.S. imperialism internationally. On the campaign trail, Trump pushed his protectionist, “America-first” message relentlessly. After being elected, he delivered on his promise to pull out of the Trans Pacific Partnership. But his threats to go further by ripping up NAFTA and starting a trade war with China met with pretty firm opposition from corporate America. For a while, the pressure seemed to work and Trump appeared to be grudgingly accepting the “conventional wisdom” of neoliberalism. However, in the recent period Trump has been ramping up the “America first” rhetoric again, both domestically and on his tour of Asia. This has been welcomed by Chinese imperialism which sees U.S. isolationism as an opportunity to spread its influence. It is also putting Trump on a collision course with key sections of corporate America and the Republican establishment.

We have pointed out that while Trump was not the choice of the ruling class as a whole, a large portion of them could live with him and his billionaire cabinet as long as he delivered on deregulation and tax cuts for corporations and the rich. Trump’s identification with white supremacists in Charlottesville, however, did cause a big section of the corporate elite to take a step away from Trump, not because of sudden opposition to structural racism but because they see a major exacerbation of racial divisions as bad for business at this stage.

What Have Trump and the Republican Party Achieved?

If DACA is fully rescinded next March without major struggle this would also be a major defeat for the immigrant population and for all those who want to see this regime defeated. It is urgent that anti-Trump activists, especially the left, draw the right conclusions from this year’s developments.

The passing of the Republicans’ tax bill should be a wake up call. This will mean a massive redistribution of wealth to corporations and the super-rich, exacerbating the record levels of inequality which already exist. It will create pressure in many states and municipalities to enact further cuts to education and social services. By ending the Obamacare mandate it is also contributing to undermining the ACA, increasing premiums and potentially leading to 13 million losing health coverage over the next decade according to the Congressional Budget Office. And the Republicans plan to go more directly after “entitlements” including Medicaid, Social Security and Medicare, next year. None of this is popular. The tax plan is supported by only 29% according to Quinnipiac ( CNN.com , 12/5/17). But failing to achieve anything would have been an even worse political setback for the GOP.

Furthermore, while the incoherence of the Republican effort on Trumpcare and the incompetence of the administration in pushing for the Muslim ban contributed to defeats for Trump they have also fed a degree of complacency and a widespread confusion about what it will take to defeat the right.

Passing Trumpcare would have been a major victory for the Republicans and a major defeat for working people, especially the poor. While there is no doubt that Trumpcare, which included radical attacks on Medicaid, became politically toxic, and there was a real groundswell of opposition, it was not clearly defeated by a mass movement.

But until December, Trump had little to show in major wins. Remember that he declared that he was going to deport millions of undocumented workers within months; build a wall on the Mexican border; repeal and replace Obamacare; rebuild the nation’s infrastructure; and “bring good jobs back” by renegotiating trade deals, “tax reform” and eliminating regulations.

Trump has indeed launched attacks on a whole range of fronts including a number specifically targeted at women and transgender people’s rights and a whole series against immigrants culminating in the threatened termination of the DACA program. These attacks have cumulatively created a climate of fear in many oppressed communities. Now the Janus case in front of the Supreme Court (a replay of the Friedrichs case that only ended in a tie because of the death of Justice Scalia) is a major threat to the public sector unions.

When Trump took office we warned that he and the Republicans would go on the offensive against immigrants, people of color, women, LGBTQ people and the unions. We pointed to the potential for mass resistance and argued that, with a bold program and a focus on mobilizing the social power of the working class, the movement could hand Trump and the Republicans decisive defeats. But we also warned that, with control over the White House, both Houses of Congress and most statehouses, the Republicans had concentrated enormous power in their hands. Trump may be beatable but likewise the danger of major and demoralizing defeats is very real.

Crisis of Republican Party Deepens

The extremely sharp divisions in the Republican Party point to the real possibility of the party splitting or partly disintegrating in the next few years, even before 2020. But while the crisis of the Democratic Party is less acute it is also, as we discuss below, on a similar path. The ground is being laid – as pointed out in a recent document produced by the Committee for a Workers Intenational (CWI) with which Socialist Alternative stands in political solidarity – for 3 or 4 major parties in the U.S. including “center right” and “center left” establishment parties as well as far right and clearly left parties. Trump’s presidency has speeded up this process on the right and slowed it down on the left but not indefinitely.

The defeat of Moore in the Alabama special Senate race represented both a rejection of Trump’s agenda and of sexual abuse. It was certainly a blow to the Trump/Bannon wing of the Republicans but also a warning to the party as a whole of the fate that could await them in the 2018 midterms. It was the first time a Democrat won a Senate seat in Alabama in 25 years. The Democrats are scrambling to get on the right side of this issue after years of looking the other way and clearly seek to head into 2018 as the party of #MeToo. But the aftermath also shows once again the political weakness of the Democrats. After defeating Moore, Democrat Doug Jones promptly went on CNN and stated that Trump should not resign because of his history of harassing and assaulting women – outrageously claiming that people need to “move on” rather than fight back.

With the 2018 midterms increasingly on legislators’ minds and the threat of a big swing to the Democrats, a number of Republican representatives, especially in “swing districts,” are retiring or preparing to distance themselves from Trump. And if Mueller’s revelations are serious enough, a whole wing of the Republicans could desert him. Roy Moore’s candidacy for the vacant Senate seat in Alabama became a proxy war in the desperate battle between the party establishment represented by Senate leader McConnell and the Bannonites. McConnell saw clearly that a party decisively associated with the predators Trump and Moore was headed towards electoral annihilation if not in 2018 then in 2020.

Bannon himself is really only the tip of this iceberg. As we have pointed out, the organized reactionary “grassroots” forces around the Republican Party like the Christian Right, the NRA and anti-immigrant groups are now fiercely committed to Trump and he has carefully nurtured their support. They may represent a distinct minority of the population and even a minority of Republican voters but their supporters are a big chunk of Republican primary voters. There is also a more general loyalty of the Republican base, beyond the organized reactionaries, to Trump as stated earlier. This dynamic has led a number of commentators to say that the Republican Party has been “captured” by Trump. There is a degree of truth in this but it is very far from a completed process.

On top of that we have seen Republican figures like Bob Corker and Jeff Flake openly attacking Trump as “unfit” for office. But what Corker and Flake have in common is that they are not running for reelection. Almost all other critical Congressional Republicans have gone silent, fearful of the “further right” forces whom Steve Bannon has been mobilizing against anyone perceived as “disloyal.” This includes the credible threat of primary challenges.

There is no doubt that the Republicans’ difficulties up until now have been to a significant degree self-inflicted due to serious internal divisions and Trump’s inept “leadership.” There is the more ideological right in Congress which refuses to “compromise” in its drive to destroy social benefits while another group, especially in “purple” districts, fears the wrath of voters disgusted by the attacks on Medicaid or a tax plan that overwhelmingly benefits the top 1%.

Section 2 – Economic Perspectives

It is still not possible to be definite about when the next recession will begin but it is likely to be a sharp downturn. If this occurs before the 2020 election and Trump is still in office it could lead to a collapse of his core support.

In the past couple years there has been growth in real wages, but quite limited for an economy allegedly close to full employment. As we have pointed out before this also reflects the weakness of the labor movement. The underlying reality for majority of the American working class is they have been going backward for a long time. A recent large-scale study showed that working men in their prime working years from 25-55 are now earning $250,000 less cumulatively, adjusted for inflation, than their counterparts 50 years ago. A key reason for this drop in lifetime income, according to the study, is the lack of decent jobs for young people entering the job market. $250,000 is the purchase price of a medium size house in many parts of the country. A bit of temporary wage growth will not change this reality ( NY Times , 9/17/2017).

The collapse of large parts of the retail sector is also a warning sign for capitalism. The only growth in retail is at the high end, luxury stores and discount stores aimed at the poor and near-poor. But retail giants which were aimed at the “middle class” (including big sections of the working class) have collapsed reflecting the long term decline in wages. This fall in the purchasing power (effective demand) of a big section of the population also points to a deeper problem of overproduction/overcapacity. The growth of debt is a temporary fix but, as we saw ten years ago, this is another bubble that will collapse. The explosion of student debt has been followed by the explosion of credit card debt, to over $1 trillion, the highest level in U.S. history ( MarketWatch.com , 8/8/17). Total household debt stands at $12.7 trillion, according to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, higher than in 2008 before the credit bubble burst ( NY Times , 5/8/17).

We have pointed out before that quantitative easing, while helping to get the economy out of the deepest recession since the 1930s, did not lead to significant levels of productive investment by big business. Rather the corporations plowed super-profits right back into the casino of the financial markets.

While the economy has continued to grow in 2017, there are definite signs of overheating. Quantitative easing and the pumping of massive amounts of liquidity into the economy with the goal of keeping interests rate super low (though the Federal Reserve is now trying to “unwind” QE) has contributed to the reemergence of bubbles in property, stocks and the financial markets. As Ruchir Sharma, chief global strategist at Morgan Stanley Investment Management recently pointed out, “Asset prices from stocks to real estate have never been this expensive simultaneously,” ( New York Times op ed, 9/14/17).

Section 3 – The Movement against Trump

As we stated in the perspectives material at the February National Committee meeting, “Obviously the current pace of demonstrations and mobilizations will not last indefinitely. At some point the movement will hit a lull either because of a clear defeat, a clear victory that brings this phase of struggle to a conclusion, or simply exhaustion. This stagnation could happen as early as the summer of 2017 although it’s impossible to be definite at this juncture.” However, some of our material in the spring exaggerated the potential for strike activity nationally.

This intense phase of activity in many ways reminiscent of the late ‘60s or the early stages of the movement against the Iraq War in 2003. But without a clear leadership, strategy and organizations of struggle in which ordinary people could really participate, there was always bound to be an ebb. As we pointed out the movement also won a partial victory when the expected wave of mass deportations did not materialize (ICE has been unleashed to go after a much wider part of the immigrant population; the result is a rise in detentions but deportations are actually down).

The mass demonstrations at the start of Trump’s presidency, first and foremost the women’s marches and the protests at airports against the Muslim ban, opened up a period of intense political activity and organizing. Meetings to discuss strategy in fighting Trump were held in communities around the country. The town-hall meetings of Republican representatives were filled with ordinary people fired up, particularly by the Republicans’ threat to health care. Networks of resistance were also developed in a number of cities against the threat of mass deportations which would have entailed wholesale raids on workplaces and communities. Native born activists were stepping up alongside immigrants. The wave of protests, some of them on a very large scale, continued until May. There were also important discussions about strike action and some work stoppages, particularly by immigrant workers, around May 1.

Extended Lull in Mass Protests

On top of that we are already in the beginning stages of the 2018 midterm elections which will tend to cut across building a mass movement in favor of an electoral push to wrest the House and statehouses from the Republicans. Even now, there are thousands of liberal and left activists whose focus has become almost entirely electoral and this will increase sharply by the middle of 2018.

The result is that there is a large amount of confusion among activists and those prepared to fight Trump. Many people do not see how an endless series of protests will bring down Trump. Neither the labor movement, the traditional women’s and civil rights organizations nor the immigrant rights organizations have to date provided the leadership needed. New mass organizations of struggle have not yet developed. And while Bernie Sanders remains with good reason the most popular politician in the country and played a generally good role in the Trumpcare fight, including introducing his Medicare for All bill, he has not built protests in the streets or used his authority to build an anti-Trump organization with a working-class appeal that can impact the debates in society.

To underline the point made earlier: the movement has suffered no decisive, demoralizing defeat in a stand up fight with Trump and the Republicans. At the same time, it did not win a major, clear cut victory over the past 10 months. Grassroots mobilizing, which exacerbated Republican divisions, played a key role in defeating Trumpcare but this victory was not the result primarily of mass actions.

Since the beginning of the summer, there has been an extended lull in mass protests which was cut across temporarily by the events in Charlottesville and the attempt of the alt-right and the fascists to come on to the streets. 40,000 marched in Boston at short notice and the threat of similar mobilizations in major cities across the country pushed back the alt-right leading them to cancel dozens of rallies. At the same time, smaller but significant protests have continued to occur in many cities, and there is no doubt that 2017 overall has been a historic year of struggle which has witnessed an acceleration of the radicalization of millions on the left in society.

How Struggle Can Redevelop

But this effect should not be exaggerated. In 2016 we continued to see struggles – like the fight against the Dakota Access Pipeline – develop in spite of the enormous energy poured into the election campaigns. And while the Democrats are clearly opposed to building a movement from below, this does not mean that they will not use mass rallies at certain points to supplement their electoral efforts. This happened in 2004 when “anybody but Bush” reached peak intensity. There was a women’s march to defend reproductive rights in Washington D.C. in April, 2004 with hundreds of thousands participating which turned into a rally for the Democrats. Later that year half a million marched outside the Republican National Convention in New York which the antiwar leaders allowed to also become a de facto rally for the Democrats.

We cannot decisively say whether and for how long the lull will continue. However, in the extremely volatile political conjuncture we are living through, any number of issues could spark extensive protest. For example, if Trump fired Mueller this would almost certainly reignite the movement in the streets. Likewise if no legislative solution is reached on DACA there could be major mobilizations at a certain stage. It is significant that Sanders and a number of other members of Congress (including possible presidential contenders Kamala Harris and Corey Booker) threatened to not vote for a government funding bill December unless Dreamer legislation is included. The bill needed 60 votes in the Senate to avert a government shutdown. But despite a lot of bluster, the Democratic leadership walked away from this fight preferring yet again to rely on the hope of negotiating a deal with the Republicans on DACA. This shows their complete spinelessness but the whole issue will be posed again in January as the bill just passed only funds government operations for a month. If the DACA issue is not resolved at the start of 2018, it seems increasingly clear that some immigrant groups will seek to organize mass protests.

We must also bear in mind that almost every major development in social struggle in recent years – from Occupy to BLM to the fight against the Dakota Access Pipeline – has happened outside of the “traditional organizations” of the labor movement or the oppressed. This is also of course part of their limitation.

We also have a new phase of the mass women’s movement which was first ignited by Trump’s unapologetic misogyny and predation. The exposure of Weinstein and now a series of other Hollywood figures and politicians through the #MeToo collective upheaval is a major development. The name and shame approach has been very effective and has forced a discussion around the issues of sexual assault and harassment in society on a scale previously unseen.

Even before the anti-Trump protests that kicked off 2017, there has been a steady flow of resistance from women to their abuse under capitalism. The Slutwalks, Carry that Weight, and #YesAllWomen all showed that young women are ready to fight back against sexism and abuse. These movements, as well as #MeToo, are part of an international revolt by women from Latin America to Eastern Europe.

Because the main focus at the moment is on abuse in the workplace, it is also raising the question of the need for collective action to fight back. This is of course especially true for working-class women who do not have famous bosses. In the restaurant, farm work, and hotel sectors, women face relentless harassment on the job. This points to a major opportunity to rebuild a fighting labor movement if the labor leadership had the imagination and drive necessary. As Sarah Leonard recently pointed out in an op-ed piece in the New York Times (11/17/2017), those organizing women workers against harassment today stand in a long tradition: “The first female-led American labor struggle was started by teenage girls working in mills in Lowell, Massachusetts in the 1830s. One of their central complaints was sexual harassment and assault by supervisors, which left them humiliated, enraged and often pregnant.”

The labor movement, as already stated, is also facing a critical threat from the Janus case in front of the Supreme Court. If upheld this would remove the ability of unions in the public sector to get dues equivalent (agency fee) payments from non-union-members covered by a union contract. This would effectively be imposing “right to work” on the entire public sector, seriously weakening unions in the area where they still retain significant influence. We have argued for a massive effort by the entire labor movement to push back against this threat but at the moment the union leaders appear to have concluded that defeat is inevitable. The unions could also galvanize much wider support if for example they made it clear they would wage an energetic struggle against racism and sexism in the workplace. As we state in the November issue of the paper, “Unions have direct needs to break out of their isolation and take a proactive, visible, social union approach to defeating Janus, opposing Trump’s unpopular agenda, and re-energizing the labor movement.”

The massive impact of BLM on U.S. society, especially on consciousness, has and will continue, the most recent example being the high profile “take a knee” protests by NFL players. However, the movement on the streets is clearly in decline. The decline of big BLM protests predates Trump’s election, showing that demoralization around Trump’s election wasn’t the key turning point for BLM’s current phase of development. However, the process was compounded by Trump’s election which upended BLM’s expectation of extracting concessions from the liberal establishment. As with the lull in anti-Trump struggles, the weakness of leadership plays a huge role in BLM’s decline.

Many people who protested around the murders of Mike Brown and Eric Garner feel that protesting hasn’t delivered, and there is some truth in this. While there are now indictments of killer cops which didn’t happen until the BLM movement, the police are almost always acquitted. People feel that the protests are not achieving justice on this central issue. In this context, a section of BLM activists are turning towards electoral politics which is a classic example of struggle being blocked in one avenue and moving toward another.