Donald Trump, a vile, narcissistic imperialist, a conniving fascist, a convicted felon with countless links to Epstein, a man crooked beyond words, a threat to many, both in his country and outside of it – Has been elected as the president of the United States, for the second time.

This can mean many horrid things. Trump has outright flaunted his desire to weaponize the military against "the enemy from within", having reportedly wanted to use the Insurrection Act against the Black Lives Matter protests in his previous term. It can even mean the outright dissolution of American bourgeois democracy, the enactment of a brutal, open, fascistic tyranny – And is even more likely to result in attempts to do so.

Today must be a call for sobriety. A call to appraise the situation properly, to remember that the election of one person does not signal the end of class struggle.

A passenger of the Titanic should have plenty of time to grieve before it hits the iceberg. But it is unwise to continue to do so until it sinks completely. To make use of that time to get to the lifeboats, or at least to attempt to improvise any, is better than the alternative of being guaranteed to drown.

Trump’s victory has not been decided today. It has been decided many months ago. My comrade, Saul Wenger, has already more than sufficiently demonstrated this in their own article, but in brief – The Democrats, in moving as close as they could to the Republicans to the point of melding with them, in offering nothing of substance besides "we are not Trump", in mismanaging the economy to the point of a recession they refuse to even acknowledge, in giving the working people nothing except words – And even in those words, wholeheartedly endorsing and supporting Israel’s "right" to genocide, and arming them with bombs to fire on children – The moment they have done this, while blocking the ability of any remotely sensible candidate to become the chief opponent to Trump – The democrats gave him the win!

Special attention must be paid to the "splitting the vote" defence of the indefensible Democrats. I shall say something that will certainly give rise to the deepest indignation from any stooge of the democratic party – The Democrats were the one who split the vote in favour of Trump!

I can only imagine how baffled these stooges must be, the exasperation, the self-rightiously twitchy-eyebrow brought forth by this uttering. How can the Democrats, the ‘main’ contender to Trump, split the vote?

But the exact opposite can be asked in turn: why should we be blamed for not voting Democrat, instead of the Democrats being blamed for not voting for, at least, a progressive candidate? For blocking the route for one to emerge?

Why did the Democrats have to split the vote by dying on the hill of, for example, endorsing genocide? Of course, one can only answer this by leading to the conclusion of not voting for Harris – Because they represent the Bourgeoisie establishment, and are as stingy and reactionary with any concession, as vile and imperialistic, as Trump.

This very argument was had, believe it or not, between the Bolsheviks [I.E. Lenin’s political faction in the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Party] and Mensheviks [Best explained as a modern social-democrat, a modern reformist, that calls themselves a Marxist]. The latter urged people to vote for the Cadets [The Liberal Bourgeoisie], against the Black Hundreds [Brutal far-right monarchists and pogromists – A very easy comparison to fascists - It holds astoundingly often!]. Lenin rightfully ridiculed this insanity:

The Mensheviks’ main argument is the Black-Hundred danger. The first and fundamental flaw in this argument is that the Black-Hundred danger cannot be combated by Cadet tactics and a Cadet policy. The essence of this policy lies in reconciliation with tsarism, that is, with the Black-Hundred danger. The first Duma sufficiently demonstrated that the Cadets do not combat the Black-Hundred danger, but make incredibly despicable speeches about the innocence and blamelessness of the monarch, the known leader of the Black Hundreds. Therefore, by helping to elect Cadets to the Duma, the Mensheviks are not only failing to combat the Black-Hundred danger, but are hoodwinking the people, are obscuring the real significance of the Black-Hundred danger. Combating the Black-Hundred danger by helping to elect the Cadets to the Duma is like combating pogroms by means of the speech delivered by the lackey Rodichev: “It is presumption to hold the monarch responsible for the pogrom.”

The second flaw in this stock argument is that it means that the Social-Democrats [P.K.: Back then, until the October revolution, it was standard for communists to refer to themselves as Social Democrats, which used to mean a different thing than today] tacitly surrender hegemony in the democratic struggle to the Cadets. In the event of a split vote that secures the victory of a Black Hundred, why should we be blamed for not having voted for the Cadet, and not the Cadets for not having voted for us?

“We are in a minority,” answer the Mensheviks, in a spirit of Christian humility. “The Cadets are more numerous. You cannot expect the Cadets to declare themselves revolutionaries.”

Yes! But that is no reason why Social-Democrats should declare themselves Cadets. The SocialDemocrats have not had, and could riot have had, a majority over the bourgeois democrats anywhere in the world where the outcome of the bourgeois revolution was indecisive. But everywhere, in all countries, the first independent entry of the Social-Democrats in an election campaign has been met by the howling and barking of the liberals, accusing the socialists of wanting to let the Black Hundreds in.

We are therefore quite undisturbed by the usual Menshevik cries that the Bolsheviks are letting the Black Hundreds in. All liberals have shouted this to all socialists. By refusing to fight the Cadets you are leaving under the ideological influence of the Cadets masses of proletarians and semi proletarians who are capable of following the lead of the Social-Democrats.[4] Now or later, unless you cease to be socialists, you will have to fight independently, in spite of the Black-Hundred danger. And it is easier and more necessary to take the right step now than it will be later on. In the elections to the Third Duma (if it is convoked after the Second Duma) it will be even more difficult for you to dissolve the bloc with the Cadets, you will be still more entangled in unnatural relations with the betrayers of the revolution. But the real Black-Hundred danger, we repeat, lies not in the Black Hundreds obtaining seats in the Duma, but in pogroms and military courts; and you are making it more difficult for the people to fight this real danger by putting Cadet blinkers on their eyes. "
- Lenin, Blocs With the Cadets, [Phillip Kovalchik: Brackets mine]

The similarities to the situation with the Cadets does not end here – But we shall get there yet. Notice what Lenin clarified as the real Black Hundred danger, and the real steps to combat it – The danger is not, and never has been, an increased vote for Trump, nor for Hitler, nor Guchkov [=Leader of the "Octoberists", a political party in Tsarist Russia which were only barely removed from the Black Hundreds]. It is much more deep rooted than this. The danger does not arise in one arbitrary date decided by the ruling class to elect their representatives on – The danger is the perpetuation of the black hundred danger, of its very existence, of its violence. The danger of Trump, to the liberal, was irrelevant until the election came close. But the real danger lies in fascist paramillitaries that have existed before and will exist after this election (and would have done so either way). The real danger, is the vile violence of the police with its militarized brutality, which minorities have felt under Trump, and under Biden. The real danger lies in the enabling of Fascism to exist, and in the obstacles set up by its enablers to combat it – Not in any presidential vote. By drawing attention away from this, "vote blue no matter who" has stultified and misdirected people for - almost - an entire presidential term. Once Trump has been defeated by the demented Biden, the far right ceased to be relevant, only to magically return just in time for election season.

Now, I ask – Have the Democrats proven able, or even willing, to combat the real Fascist danger? Or have they proven to be nothing beyond enablers of it, a mere organ of the far right, meant to prevent an actual opposition from becoming mainstream?

This is the result of so-called "harm reduction". The policy, not of preventing harm, not even of ‘mitigating’ it, but of voting for a willful enabler. To delay the inevitable by one more term, and let it grow in strength, while preventing and limiting any outrage that can grow into a viable alternative.

Trump was "defeated" in a vote four years ago – And the result was his re-election, and the MAGA movement is all the more emboldened, all the more radical for it. The democrats, having staked everything on this one ill-conceived point of failure, are caught with their pants down (closer to the center of earth than to their ankles!).

One particularly stinging truth remains - All of the vain promises made by Harris could have been fulfilled right now! She is the vice president, after all. It is her party currently in power. And would she have won, the administration would have remained the same. What better proof is needed to see these promises are devoid of value?

One needs not take my word for it – Take her own!

There is not a thing that comes to mind … and I’ve been part of most of the decisions that have had impact
- Harris, The View Interview

We continue to maintain, wholeheartedly, that refraining from voting for any of the two major parties has been the correct decision. The Democratic party has no one to blame except itself and its policies.

On this topic, Lenin stated:

So you reduce the Black-Hundred danger to the danger of a Black-Hundred victory in elections faked by the government! Cannot you understand, gentlemen, that by putting the question in this way, you are admitting that the government is already victorious, and that the cause of liberty, which you prate about so much, is already lost? You yourselves do not see, and you are preventing the masses of the people from seeing, the real Black-Hundred danger, which is manifested not in the voting, but in the definition of the conditions of voting (the Senate interpretations and the impending repeal of the electoral law of December 11), in the nullification of the results of voting (the dissolution of the Duma). You are entirely adopting the vulgar liberal point of view and are concentrating your minds—and the minds of the mass of the people whom you are misleading—on a struggle within the limits of a fake law which is being still further faked. You fail to see the BlackHundred danger in the form of the possible arrest of all the electors. You throw away that which depends on you, and wholly on you, which is at any rate a lasting and substantial asset to the revolution, namely: the development of the revolutionary spirit of the masses by consistent agitation. On the other hand, what you are chasing after depends not on you, but on the artifices of Stolypin, on a new Senate interpretation, on further violations of the electoral law by the police. Consequently, you are fighting the “Black-Hundred danger” in exactly the same way as the French bourgeois republicans are fighting the monarchist danger; namely, by strengthening monarchist institutions and the monarchist constitution within the republic. For, by instilling into the minds of the people the idea that the Black-Hundred danger is the danger of an increased Black-Hundred vote, you are perpetuating the ignorance of the most backward masses as to the real source and real nature of the Black-Hundred danger.
-Lenin, When You Hear the Judgement of a Fool...

This is precisely what is most needed right now. To combat the fascist danger, to fight for the causes of safety, of freedom, of justice and for socialism – The democratic party must perish. Let any force that considers itself even somewhat progressive join together to accomplish this – The first step is making use out of this debacle, of holding the Democratic party accountable to its misdeeds, correctly hating and rejecting it for the election results it brought forward, for making these results a matter of time.

Hope remains, and it lies in this: The best thing that could have come out of this election, and the only good thing that could have gone out of it, is to teach the workers a bitter lesson – That they must lead themselves, that it is impossible to rely on the old political institutions. The working class must pursue its own, independent, policy. For this, to prevent the democrats splitting the vote again, the party of "republicanist MAGA With a human face" must perish; The option must not be "Evil" and "Evil claiming itself just"; Socialism cannot come through ballot, but improvements to life just may; If the democratic party retains its shaky position and re-consolidates it, if no alternative is fostered in these four years, this horrible choice shall repeat...

But if the cause of justice will make the most of this situation, the choice may involve a popular front, or in any case – A candidate that is at least good, that will at least be willing to part with concessions, that will represent the bourgeoisie reaction to this viable alternative being formed. We must create some bargaining power, to at least force them to give us something in the negotiating table. It was not ‘lesser evilism’ behind Lula da Silva beating Bolsonaro in Brazil, or the NFP forming a viable alternative against the far right in France. Neither of these options are the full, maximal ‘goodness’ we are looking for (socialism, which cannot come through elections). But they are, at the very least, a good option, Insofar as an exploitative system can be "good". These options enable us greater freedom of action, more ‘ceding’ in the face of public pressure, real and tangible improvements – As opposed to their only selling point being ‘the status quo’.

This was also outlined by Lenin:

`What is this nature from the economic point of view? It is the fact that the liberals are a party of the bourgeoisie, which is afraid of the movement of the peasant masses, and still more of the workers’ movement, for this movement is capable of limiting (at present, in the immediate future, without changing the capitalist system as a whole) the extent and forms of the bourgeoisie’s economic privileges. And the economic privilege of the bourgeoisie is ownership of capital, an ownership which in Russia yields twice or three times as much profit as in Europe.

To uphold this “Russian” superprofit, it is necessary to prevent the third camp from gaining independence.

For example, the bourgeoisie can rule quite well even if the working day is eight hours. In fact, its rule will then be fuller, purer, wider and freer than with a ten- or eleven-hour day. But the dialectics of the class struggle are such that, unless there is an extreme need, unless it is the last remedy, the bourgeoisie will never replace the tranquil, habitual, profitable (from an Oblomov point of view) ten-hour day by an eight-hour one.

What we have said about an eight-hour day applies to the upper chamber, to landlordism and many other things.

The bourgeoisie will not relinquish the tranquil, convenient, profitable, old-Russian forms of exploitation to replace them only by European, only by democratic forms (for democracy, let it be said without offence to the ardent heroes of Zavety, is also a form of bourgeois rule); it will not do so, we say, unless there is an extreme need, and unless it is the last remedy.

This need can arise only from the movement of the masses achieving a certain system and strength. And the bourgeoisie, which upholds its economic interests, is fighting against this movement, that is to say, against the independence of the third camp.

What is the class nature of liberalism from the political point of view? It is fear of the movement of these same social elements, for that movement is capable of undermining political privileges which the bourgeoisie values. Liberalism dreads democracy more than reaction. This was proved in 1905, 1906 and 1907.
-Lenin, A Talk on “Cadet-Eating”

This brings me to the conclusion of this work, and the reason for its title. The American working class must amputate the infected limb, the parasite, the democratic party. It must do so, for only in this way can it move to the offensive, that to achieve this will attain capturing more ground even under Trump, than Harris and Biden would have given "freely" out of the "kindness of their hearts" combined (I.E. None).

This is not only the prerequisite for attaining even a marginal improvement in life. This is a prerequisite, too, for the only way to solve injustice in the United States completely, to tear it from its root, a revolution. When the empty promises are replaced with militant demands, when timidity, inaction, and aid to fascism is replaced with a burning hatred to it, when instead of attempting to "conquer" it in a ballot, the ‘opposition’ to it shall prove befitting of this term, and prepare armed regiments of the proletariat to instill the deepest terror in the hearts of every fascist terrorist, and make use of this exceptional ability of the American proletariat to do this even legally, when republican policies shall be met, not with more republican policies, but instead having every infringement on the well-being of the working class by the apparatus of exploitation, be met by an enlargement and strengthening of the apparatus meant to overthrow it, then, and only then, shall there be a way to prevent ‘more Trumps’, and any talk of protecting Transgender rights, national minorities, and working class families prove to be fully realizable.

Any person who hides behind these on election season, but will have forgotten about them now, and prove to hamper the struggle to part with this bloated, infected carcass of a party will reveal their real priorities: Not the real attainment of any such ends, but the inflating of their own ego, the mere attainment of this oppressor being chosen instead of that oppressor.

But those who are sincere will move in the best, and only, possible route to defend and expand these rights, the route that proceeded under Biden and will continue under Trump. The lesson of today proved to all who do not refuse to see it, that this is the only path forward.

Down with the Republican oppressors! Down with the Democrat oppressors!

Long live the working class!

Workers of the world, unite!