Losing the Argument for Structural Change

Graham Platner organized a Senate campaign for significant social change, and Maine Democrats voted overwhelmingly for it.

I won’t belabor the debate over Graham Platner’s purported character. Character is often the clarion call of Republicans, who in a double–standard, have even less. As a white, university–educated, middle–aged, cisgendered heterosexual male, I’m among the last people to fathom the allegations about his past behavior. But I will point out that people in my structural position, and higher in social status, have been among the first to exploit those allegations for gain. It’s privilege that resorts in that way to reductionist attacks on character. It’s also privilege also that allows me to “bracket” concerns about Platner’s past. The lived experience of women does not allow them that luxury. But I exert that privilege to bracket concerns about an individual’s character to make a point about the bid to change social structures that accord people with significantly less privilege, that is to say a disadvantaged “positionality.” One of Platner’s strengths, shared in the far less problematic campaign of Adbul El–Sayed in Michigan, is the ability speak plainly. Put simply: Platner’s campaign was about changing the social structures that ensure certain identities are disadvantaged, and even increasingly erased. The media outcry over Platner’s alleged past misconduct is thunderous relative to the whisper about women and minorities in the military losing their careers in Hegseth’s purge of woke. A Senator is not an ATM machine, but Susan Collins queried Hegseth more about the “Bath Built” battleships than her “concern” for women.

My “concern,” which I assert as an ally trying to use this otherwise useless privilege, is that in the selection of a candidate to replace Platner, we lose two things: the argument for significant structural change to our politics, and the votes of over 152,000 Mainers, the largest ever in a Maine Democratic primary, for that change. As a sociologist, thinking in social structure is the hill upon which I will die.

I cast Platner aside because that’s already been done, by his withdrawal, and most notably by the voices I know and trust in Maine, who in their hard work have labored against social structures to the benefit of the disadvantaged. Our State Senate President Mattie Daughtry is first among these.

I first encountered Daughtry when she was running for State Senate, when I first moved to Maine, in a “meet the candidates” Zoom meeting. I asked a question about supporting higher education in Maine, and she gave the most detailed reply, referring to her work on support of education as a state rep. I no longer live in her district, but I work in it, and have followed her career with interest. She led the effort to bring paid family medical leave to Maine. It’s of material benefit in a state where family members are likely caregivers. That’s structural change that employers have resisted.

Dirigo. Latin for “I lead,” is the state’s motto. Maine should continue to lead for such significant social change.

The Maine Democratic leadership acknowledges that the campaign to unseat Sen. Collins is “too big to fail,” or rather, too important to lose because of one person’s failings. Heck, the grassroots have brought the receipts.

Maine does not need a Senator whose skillful prevarication continually sells it out to the billionaire class who bankrolls her for scraps from its table. Maine needs a proven fighter. In the short time before us to choose a replacement for Platner, my money’s on Shenna Bellows, a fighter who’s proven the ability to stand up to Trump on the very issue of election security. She’s already stood up for fiercely independent Maine in the national arena in ways far beyond that of a mere ATM machine.

This blog on Substack has been called “Provisional Understanding.” I coined it in the wake of the pandemic, mindful of the humility that scholars bring to the pursuit of truth. This was brought home to me in an exchange I had on social media about vaccines. Someone had said that the CDC had lied about whether the COVID vaccine would prevent transmission. They pointed to an interview of CDC chief Rochelle Walensky. What she said was akin to “the data available to us now indicates that it does.” New data, new finding. It makes transmission less likely, but that likelihood is never zero.

My support for Platner was my provisional understanding of what was best for Maine at the time. New data, new finding. We can only ever approximate. Conspiracism offers an easy certitude; only painstakingly hard work can achieve consensus. (I think here of climate change.)

It bears mentioning that Platner’s rank–ordered picks did not, in knee–jerk fashion, choose Troy Jackson, with whom he and Bernie Sanders shared a stage to launch their campaigns. He chose, in this order, Bellows, Jackson, and Pingree, our current nominee for Governor.

Janet Mills should not just slide in there. The DSCC should not have its way. Chuck Schumer should not. AIPAC should not. As in Michigan, the Democratic Party establishment should be dragged to the progressive agenda that actually will win the hearts and minds.

Hardworking Maine Democrats should have the change agenda for which they already voted definitively. I hope the pending convention (gift article) represents painstakingly hard work to achieve consensus.