Massachusetts is quite a unique state. It consistently ranks in the top five in education, healthcare, environmental conservation. Politically, the Democratic Party has control over every major political position except for the governor. Unlike states with similar characteristics such as New York or California, few outside the “Commonwealth” pay little attention to life there. Besides sports teams and universities such as Harvard or MIT, they may only be familiar with one city (Boston) and two vacation spots (Martha’s Vineyard and Cape Cod).
Massachusetts has always been regarded as one of the country’s most foremost progressive bastions. Whether it be its early commitment towards public education or its abolitionist activities, progressive activism has tended to face fewer obstacles than in other places.
It is this history and its contemporary characteristics that make Massachusetts a prime target for a state-wide social democratic project. The idea of a social democratic project is simple: one part includes the expansion of public goods (healthcare, education, transportation, parks, and so on), and a second includes the expansion of democracy (greater state-wide and community participation).
Because of the rather diverse nature of organizing in Massachusetts, there are few issues that groups are not taking part in. These efforts span from reforming the discipline process in high schools to establishing a public bank and they exist at both the state-wide and local levels.
Thus, the immediate obstacle in the way of a popular social democratic movement in Massachusetts appears to be not a lack of organizing or number of organizations, but the overall coordination between these movements to build support for their efforts and towards a more egalitarian vision of the state.
Another complex, but not so complex issue is how to build a movement that challenges imperialism. Imperialism in today’s context can sound like a loaded and difficult word to comprehend, but a simple explanation should help clear any confusion.
For this essay I will focus on two core aspects of contemporary imperialism: military power and supply chains/trade.
Military Power
Historically, military power has been one of the greatest forces in maintaining inequalities within and between countries. This is quite obvious when thinking about the spread and enforcement of colonialism, for example.
The US arms trade, not to mention both direct and indirect US military interventions have gone on to support repressive regimes and crush popular social movements.
It is a result of the United States' military power (backed by its financial power) that allows it to act unilaterally in selling weapons and dropping bombs as well as liberally imposing economic sanctions and embargos. This permits the United States to deliberately change economic, political, and social conditions of people around the world while escaping accountability for its actions.
Already in Massachusetts, there are groups such as Mass Peace Action that are organizing against the presence of weapons manufacturer Raytheon as well as leading other anti-war/anti-sanction campaigns.
Another, and what is considered to be the key source of modern imperialist relations, are supply chains/trade.
Supply Chains, Trade, and Unequal Exchange
Supply chains instantly become demystified when you think of questions like Where is my shirt from? How did this computer go from a scrap of parts to my lap?. To break this down further, an over arching question to ask is Why is my shirt made in X country. The quite simple answer is that generally companies can pay far less for the same productive effort than they can in Massachusetts.
So let’s say in Massachusetts tshirts can be made at a rate of 100 shirts per hour and labor costs $20 per hour. Further in country X they can make 50 shirts an hour but the wage is $1 dollar per hour. Thus, even though country X is only half as productive, wages are 1/20th the level of Massachusetts. Therefore, with a net effect of 1/10th, these extremely low labor costs incentivize companies to relocate to country X.
To make up for the low productivity these companies subject workers to poor working conditions and long hours. This creates the infamous “race to the bottom” where companies are pursuing lower and lower costs at the expense of contributing to transformative economic development.
It is these inequalities that produce what is commonly referred to as ‘unequal exchange’. In the Global North, many companies have monopoly power which allows them to set prices artificially high. In the Global South, prices are kept low due to the process described above as well as other mechanisms that put downward pressure the prices of agricultural products and raw materials.
Therefore the price differences between the exchange of products between the Global North and South disguise a significant transfer of value from the latter to the former. This transfer is the central feature of contemporary imperialism.
Moving Forward
From here there are several different paths that can be taken to instill an anti-imperialist ethic. Taking, unequal exchange as the benchmark for assessing the trajectory of the success of an anti-imperialist movement, the goal would be to consider ways to reduce monopoly power in the Global North and/or raise wages in the Global South.
The former has major challenges. On a state-wide level this proves immensely difficult as trade deals are negotiated between the federal government and other countries and international bodies.
Nevertheless, it is crucial to build support among local communities, for example, to stand up against the investor-state tribunals established under trade agreements that provides avenues for corporations to readily undermine local zoning, investment, and environmental regulations. This can be one way of building international solidarity.
On the conditions of labor in the Global South it is important for organizers to gain familiarity with web of supply chains and international trade that link Massachusetts with the rest of the world. This not only helps build support for supporting labor across the globe, but allows for more targeted support that directly contributes to the improvement labor conditions and a decrease in unequal exchange.
Further, constructing an anti-imperialist movement requires a serious understanding of and organizing around the colonialist legacy of Massachusetts and the United States. This includes indigenous liberation and the centering of immigration, environmental, racial, gender, sexual and reproductive justice.
Therefore as the effort to expand public goods and democratic participation in Massachusetts gains full steam, the inclusion of an anti-imperialist flank allows the movement to reproduce movements for economic equality elsewhere. If successful, this assures that the improvements brought about by a social democratic agenda do not depended on increasing exploitation.
By creating a more robust movement for economic and social equality that is able to link Massachusetts with the rest of the world, this opens the doors to further opportunities to democratize the economy (and not just in Massachusetts!) and create a true model of global justice that can be replicated across the country.
