Now that Joe Biden has been replaced by his Vice President, Kamala Harris, in the US presidential race against Donald Trump, the question of whether the political left in that country should support Harris is up for debate. The fact that she is part of an administration that has systematically funded and condoned the genocide in Gaza for long months has lent this question a particularly contentious character.

The issue of whether Harris should be supported with a view to foiling Trump’s bid to regain the White House is obviously a pressing consideration. However, the “lesser evil” approach to electoral contests is a matter of much wider concern. Indeed, here in Canada, we can expect the next federal election to bring with it proposals from some on the left to hold off Pierre Poilievre and the Conservatives by strategically and selectively supporting Liberal candidates.

When it comes to lesser evils, it must surely be agreed that, from a political perspective, Harris represents an evil in her own right. She shares direct responsibility with “Genocide Joe” for the horrors that have been inflicted on Gaza, however much she tries to pretend otherwise. As Avik Jain Chatlani puts it, “Perhaps the only thing more sickening than the unconditional support of the Biden-Harris administration for the ethnic cleansing of Palestine is that Harris is now trying to distance herself from her own record.”

While this condemnation of Harris is well-deserved, it must be acknowledged that the dangers of a second Trump presidency are very real, and those who wish to prevent it are raising valid concerns. It would be a mistake, as Natalia Tylim points out in an essay in Tempest magazine, to “minimize the deeply felt fear of Trump that could drive one to accept lesser-evil politics. Many working class people and the oppressed are (rightly) terrified about what harm and violence a Trump presidency would do.”

A dead-end strategy

Although I don’t dismiss the threat that Trump poses, I believe the lesser evil approach is a strategic error for the left. I am not directing this at those who actually embrace Harris’s politics, but rather at those who see tactical support for her as a means of deflecting the threat from the right. And I am less concerned with how individuals choose to vote than with the implications of “lesser evilism” for left organizations, unions and social movements.

The debate around whether to prop up the liberal centre to keep the right at bay has been going on for a long time but it has taken on greater urgency since the financial crisis and Great Recession of 2008-10. Since then, uncertain and volatile social and economic conditions have spawned a mood of reactionary rage in large segments of society. This has expressed itself in developments like the MAGA movement in the US and various forms of right-wing denialism, such as we saw in Canada with the so-called Freedom Convoy in 2022.

At the same time, this rightward shift has had a major influence on mainstream conservative parties. Those members who have been associated with a more moderate and respectable political brand have faced a challenge from hard-right populist leadership contenders who reflect the reactionary mood within party ranks. Trump is an obvious example of such a development but so too is Pierre Poilievre.

The nefarious objectives of these right-wing populist parties, led by those who deliberately whip up a dangerous and reactionary base of support, are very alarming. Their ascendency, moreover, coincides with a marked erosion of credibility for the parties and leaders of the political centre. These more moderate forces are very deeply associated with the implementation of neoliberal austerity, a long period of sluggish economic performance and global conditions of polycrisis. As such, they face a veritable crisis of legitimacy.

The Trudeau Liberals clearly embody this political development. They continue to govern without a majority in Parliament, with the backing of the NDP, but, as the loss of their safe Toronto-St. Paul’s riding in a June by-election indicates, they face a disastrous reckoning in the next election. Recent developments in France exhibit the same tendencies on an even more dramatic scale. Emmanuel Macron set himself up for an electoral catastrophe because his discredited brand of politics could offer no viable alternative to the hateful politics of Marine Le Pen’s National Rally party and the far-right. It took an initiative from the left to prevent a victory by the French forces of re-branded fascism.

Despite its limitations and contradictions, the Nouveau Front Populaire advanced significant alternatives to both the far-right and Macron’s regressive agenda. As such, it gave electoral form to what John Mullen has referred to as “public hatred of neoliberal reform” and became an expression of working-class opposition.

The last few years offer ample evidence that a strategy of trying to prevent the right from taking parliamentary power by propping up the political centre is becoming less and less viable.

The right peddles false and hateful views and cynically presents itself as a challenge to elite interests. In practice, of course, it defends the elites and stokes the politics of resentment and division within society, never missing an opportunity to promote xenophobia and racist scapegoating. On this basis, the right is building a base and its message is resonating in ways that the tired establishment parties of the centre won’t be able to counter. This task requires a clear and strong left alternative, which is why it is politically disastrous for unions, social movements and those on the left to campaign for that discredited political centre.

While it would be absurd to negate the differences between Trump and Harris or Poilievre and Trudeau, the left must recognize that these leaders are all political representatives of our enemies and we should be focused on building resistance to the political agendas they seek to impose on us. How can we step up social mobilization and resistance if we are devoting our energies to getting the vote out for the very people we should be fighting?

The urgent need for solidarity with Palestine and active opposition to US support for genocide brings this question home in the most vivid way possible. Kamala Harris isn’t only a presidential candidate but vice president in an administration that is making that genocide possible. As Israel’s crimes intensify and the threat of regional conflagration increases, it would be tragic for the momentum of the Palestine solidarity movement to be disrupted due to skittishness over holding Harris fully accountable.

Demobilization of movements

As David McNally and Charles Post argue, during the last presidential race between Trump and Biden, the Democratic machine worked hard to demobilize the Black Lives Matter/Defund the Police movement that was underway at the time. Trump and his base were pushed back by this powerful movement on the streets but the perceived electoral needs of the Democrats triumphed and the momentum of the struggle was lost. We are at risk of a similar development now and we have to recognize that mass solidarity with the Palestinian struggle will be desperately needed in the US no matter whether it is Harris or Trump who moves into the White House.

In Canada, the question of lesser evilism and the left will soon be put before us in very stark terms. The defeat of moderate conservatism at the hands of Pierre Poilievre, with his harshly right-wing agenda and deeply reactionary base of core support, raises many of the same issues and dangers as the looming threat of Donald Trump south of the border.

It’s a sure bet that the approaching federal election, which must be held by October 2025, will bring forth calls for the left to support the Trudeau Liberals in ridings where NDP candidates are unlikely to win in order to repel the Conservative barbarians at the gate. This follows from the NDP’s role in propping up the Liberal minority government rather than providing a clear alternative—a position that has significantly alienated the NDP support base, as the National Post delighted in pointing out.

In the US, it is quite possible that Harris will manage to keep Trump out of the White House; in Canada, however, it seems very likely the Liberals have simply reached the end of their shelf life. Either way, our movements have nothing to gain by tying themselves to political forces we should be disputing rather than endorsing.

Whether the hard right or the liberal centre holds power, working class communities are facing an implacable enemy. We can’t build the united and powerful movement the situation demands if we periodically put our struggles on hold to campaign for the more moderate representatives of the very agenda we need to defeat. We must remain sharply focused on building a socialist alternative for the years ahead.

John Clarke is a writer and retired organizer for the Ontario Coalition Against Poverty (OCAP). Follow his tweets at @JohnOCAP and blog at johnclarkeblog.com.