Why I wouldn't vote for the Socialist Equality Party even if it's on the ballot

I decided to pull this out as a separate piece before running my "Gadfly slate" presidential endorsement.

IF Joseph Kishore, the candidate of the Trots of the Socialist Equality Party, were available by write-in, that's would be an option to whom my choice will be. But it's not, because the SEP, despite some bashing of the PSL, doesn't get on hardly any states' ballots. As of late August, per Wiki, it was only eligible to win 17 electoral votes and has NEVER been on enough ballots to be eligible for more than 73. The PSL has never been eligible to win a majority, but it has never been below 125 EVs. Oh, and Blue Anon snowflakes claiming "below 270" means they're a spoiler? Shut up until you admit being part of the anti-democratic party. (As of earlier this month, the tiny, pseudo-Trot cultists of the Socialist Workers Party were actually on the ballot on more states with more EVs.)

That said, two other things:

First, the WSWS is basically the "house organ" of the SEP. I used to belong to the World Socialist Web Site email group back when Yahoo Groups existed, but let that go. And, the SEP in general, and Kishore in particular, oppose identity politics period, full stop. And, in Kishore's case, virulently. Also, contra Kishore, the Wuhan lab leak theory is NOT a lie. I am guessing he attacks it because he defends the idea that China is actually a Communist state, which, of course, it is not. (Oh, also, Kishore? It's called "Xinjiang." And, no, that's not US-CIA bullshit.)

And, while I think identity politics can be pushed too hard, and, within the duopoly, can be a source of grifting, I don't have blanket opposition to them, either. I certainly don't think that identity politics are per se an instrument of capitalism. As for him co-authoring a set of essays against the  1619 project, I know it has problems, too. Was it totally wrong, though? No.

That said, with the killing of Trayvon Martin by George Zimmerman, the party, with both its 2012 presidential candidate, and Kishore, then as now the national secretary, officially denied his killing was about race.  That link, per the person's Blogger profile, is from some Maoist time, but, it deserves an extensive pull quote.

A subsequent SEP article on its World Socialist Web Site titled “The Killing of Trayvon Martin and Racial Politics in America” (wsws.org, 5 April) by its National Secretary Joseph Kishore allows that “racial prejudice may [!!] have played a role in the killing of Martin.” But he asserts that the eruption of massive protests had nothing to do with race, much less the daily reality of racist terror against black people in this society. That Martin’s killer, George Zimmerman, saw a young black man in a hoodie as a dangerous predator also is of no consequence to Kishore. Instead, he presents this cop wannabe as one of many “disturbed individuals” whose “violent actions” are the product of the “tensions building up in American society” as a result of the current economic crisis. This is kind of like describing lynchings in the Jim Crow South as the product of the economic dislocations resulting from the destruction of slavery but…having nothing to do with race.

Kishore presents such arguments as a statement of supposed working-class opposition to the Democratic Party, which he proclaims is using “the killing of Martin to promote the reactionary politics of racial identity.” As evidence, Kishore points to an observation by Jesse Jackson that “racial profiling is all too common in the US, and has led to the killing of a young man.” Who other than an apologist for racism or perhaps an escapee from an asylum for the criminally insane could deny that this is an elementary statement of fact? The problem isn’t that Jackson, Al Sharpton and others of their ilk are fanning the flames of outrage against racist reaction in America. On the contrary, their purpose is precisely to contain such outrage and keep it safely in the channels of pro-Democratic Party electoralism.

Wowsa. 

I found the piece while doing a net search to try to find out Kishore's ethnic background. Of which, I got zero hits. AFAIK, from one video in particular, he's not only not Black, but not Black-White biracial. Maybe partially Indian, as in ancestors from the subcontinent? "Kishore" is, at least in people with that background, a Sanskrit-derived name.

That said, he looks awfully Anglo in a photo near the end of this WSWS piece. And, in that photo at left.

I'll add that it's "interesting" that EVERY one of the SEP presidential candidates has been White since Helen Halyard of its predecessor in 1992.

It's also also interesting that every one of them has been male, other than Halyard of the pre-SEP era. The White male Trots party. You want that on your tombstone? 

I don't know what Halyard thought of any of this; she lived until 2023.

Also interesting? The UK branch of the SEP, though presumably preaching for a classless society, uses "sir" for people like Sir Keir Starmer. Reminds me of Churchill saying that Clement Atlee ran the monarchy up the flagpole and saluted more than he did.

People like Mark Lause and the late Mimi Soltysik have decried Leftist infighting. Within the Communist-rooted portion of the American Left, I think you'll never get rid of it.