Some would have us believe that the current Portland City Council is strong on diversity. Half of the 12 are women, five are defined as people of color and three identify as LGBTQ+.
If that’s how we measure diversity, we may lead the nation. But is that the kind of diversity that matters most in a democracy?
Biodiversity, which still means what it did when I was in school, is about a wide range of species, genes and habitats coexisting to the benefit of the entire ecosystem. Domination by a single element of the biosphere weakens the whole, undermining its resiliency and capacity to adapt to change.
The “diversity” of this council goes in such a direction, a so-called progressive caucus of six trying to dominate through cunning, cliquishness and all means necessary. Rather than considering a variety of viewpoints, it devolves into us-versus-them showdowns. In the first year under this cohort, it took four hours and 10 votes to elect a chair. This year, the process stretched to three days and 13 votes. With that revealing annual chore behind it, the council often deadlocked 6-6 along the same lines on other items of business.
There’s a saying that goes: The only thing better than finding a solution is having someone else to blame for the problem.
This is at heart a power struggle between a unified ideological group known as Peacock—guided by four members of the Democratic Socialists of America—and a more diverse remainder coalescing in defense. The result is a rigid and fragile body playing brinkmanship instead of taking care of the business of the city.
Diversity of thought has no place in DSA’s world. As in war, unifying the troops and enforcing discipline becomes paramount.
The socialists on the council understand this. A Portland DSA questionnaire outlined expectations of candidates they endorse:
Do you agree with the DSA National platform? Will you fight for the demands in the platform?
Will you pledge to form a Socialist Caucus with other DSA-endorsed candidates?
DSA-backed council members are not free to consider better ideas or adapt to changing circumstances. They are to be loyal foot soldiers who accept DSA ideology out of hand.
The tightly controlled cabal holding half the seats on the Portland City Council—none of whom would even have been serious candidates before charter reform—understands how it attained disproportionate power. If it doesn’t, DSA leaders will remind them. In a system requiring only 25% of the votes to win, the organization perfected a campaign strategy directed toward hardcore believers rather than a broad message acceptable to a majority of voters.
This path does not instill victors with a deep faith in the general public or in mainstream voters unattuned to the logistics of the new electoral system. This path does not need to waste time persuading the masses who do not already agree with their assessment of capitalism’s fatal flaws. Neighborhood associations are seen as tending to minor livability annoyances, matters unrelated to the exploitation of the working class.
DSA’s name includes “democratic” because so many socialist regimes around the globe in this century and the last have devolved into autocracies. But appropriating the term does not overcome the inherent authoritarianism in radical socialism’s core critique of society or its plan to remake it.
Last November, the Peacock bloc on council thought it had secretly lined up seven votes to cut funding for homeless camp sweeps. The gambit, made without public input and only five days warning, failed when the expected seventh vote fell through. The peak of DSA power may have passed at that juncture; after the election in November, we may know for sure.
Socialism is not a dirty word. It is an element in all modern governments. But socialism not rooted in respect for democracy—and a diversity of opinion—is not American. I don’t believe it is even Portlandian.
Well said.