SOMEONE ELSE

Politics of Kamale Haris

Not a "radical and crazy" progressive agenda. Radical and crazy is the Republican Party with Trump at the head: it wants more tax breaks for billionaires and more cuts to health and social security

5302 views 2 comment(s)
Photo: Reuters
Photo: Reuters
Disclaimer: The translations are mostly done through AI translator and might not be 100% accurate.

Listen to Donald Trump or tune in Fox News and you'll hear the constant refrain: Kamala Harris is "more radical" and "far left" than Bernie Sanders.

I know this will shock you, but it simply isn't the case.

However, it is always difficult to respond to Trump's lies because the next day he will come up with some even more nonsensical ones. In any case, as we rally to defeat Trump and elect Vice President Harris, let me remind you of just one simple fact: despite what the corporate media and political establishment tell you, the so-called "radical" and "far-left" agenda that the progressive bori movement enjoys enormous popularity.

Poll after poll shows that our ideas are supported by a vast majority of Americans who have the crazy idea that maybe, just maybe, government should represent the needs of all of us, not just wealthy campaign donors. It is also important to understand that many of these "radical" ideas have already been implemented in countries around the world.

In other words, it's not "radical and crazy" what we're proposing, it's how radical and crazy the United States is compared to other wealthy nations in protecting working families, the elderly, children, the sick, and the disabled.

Here are some examples:

When we talk about guaranteeing health care for everyone as a human right, we are talking about the possibility of each of us, regardless of income, to go to the doctor when we get sick and not go bankrupt when we leave the hospital. We are talking about the right to change jobs without fear of losing health care. Does that really sound radical to you?

When we talk about our government using its bargaining power to negotiate lower prescription drug prices, we're talking about ending the absurdity of Americans paying far and away the highest prices in the world for such drugs. Does that really sound radical to you?

When we talk about paid family and medical leave, we're talking about young moms and dads being able to spend the first few months with their newborn child without rushing to get back to work as early as next week, and we're talking about being able to care for loved ones when they're sick, without fear of losing salary or job. Does that really sound radical to you?

When we talk about strengthening public education, childcare and decent salaries for teachers, we are talking about ensuring that all our children, regardless of family income, receive the quality education they need to prepare for the future. Does that really sound radical to you?

When we talk about tuition-free college, we're talking about the right of all Americans to get a higher education without going into terrible debt. We are talking about the ability of the United States to have the kind of highly educated workforce that we need to compete effectively in a highly competitive global economy. Does that really sound radical to you?

When we talk about a "Green New Deal," we're talking about creating millions of good-paying, unionized jobs that will transform our energy system, protect us from climate change, and create a livable planet for future generations—with less drought, less famine, less flood, less extreme weather. , diseases and human suffering. Does that really sound radical to you?

When we talk about raising the minimum wage to a living wage, we're talking about ending starvation wages, so that people don't have to work two or three jobs just to make ends meet for their families. Does that really sound radical to you?

When we talk about strengthening and expanding social security, we are talking about the fact that all our old people can retire and live with dignity. Does that really sound radical to you?

When we talk about expanding health insurance to cover dental, hearing and vision diseases, we are talking about our elderly being able to chew the food they eat, hear the voices of their loved ones and see the world around them. Does that really sound radical to you?

When we talk about the adoption of the law on the right to organize, we are talking about giving workers the opportunity to exercise their constitutional right to union struggle against illegal, corporate opponents. Does that really sound radical to you?

When we talk about ending corporate campaign finance and turning to public financing of elections, we are talking about the need to protect our democracy and prevent billionaires and their political action committees from buying elections. Does that really sound radical to you?

When we talk about forcing the wealthy to pay a fair tax, we're simply saying it's time to address the unprecedented levels of income and wealth inequality that currently exist and end the regressive tax system that allows billionaires a lower tax rate than nurses or truck drivers. Does that really sound radical to you?

To conclude: what we are fighting for it is not radical agenda. It's a common-sense agenda supported by the vast majority of Americans.

Let me tell you what radical is. It's the Republican party that wants more tax breaks for billionaires and huge cuts to health and social security, to let polluters destroy our planet, and pharmaceutical companies to charge us as much as they want.

That's radical.

So what are we to do about it?

Let's work overtime in the next few months to defeat Trump and get Kamala Harris and Tim Waltz elected. Let's do what we can to support progressive candidates across the country - and there are many.

And then, the morning after victory, let's accelerate our efforts to educate and organize the American people to implement a plan that works for everyone, not just the one percent.

(The Guardian; Peščanik.net, translation: M. Jovanović)

Bonus video:

(Opinions and views published in the "Columns" section are not necessarily the views of the "Vijesti" editorial office.)