You raise a good question. The problem is twofold: 1) the U.S. Left is largely petit-bourgeois and divorced from the working class (and its rising unemployment) and therefore gravitates to the Democratic Party as its natural political home, because 2) there is no independent - or even D.P.-dependent - mass working class movement in response to the economic crisis as of yet, and therefore no alternative force for middle class leftists to gravitate towards. The two conditions dialectically reinforce one another.
Glum comparisons with conditions in the 1930's are in order, but don't overlook a positive flip-side of the absence of a substantial working class-oriented Left: the absence also of an organization such as the C.P. that was positioned to steer the working class movement back into the D.P., as well as the absence of the shining example of a bold bourgeois reformer to steer them towards: just compare the courageous FDR to the pathetically weak Obama. BTW, this latter difference is _not_ the product of an FDR urgently moving to head off the threat of an independent working class movement, whereas Obama does not face such an urgency; rather, it reflects the profound change in the resources (and subsequently historical character) of the U.S. ruling class that granted FDR tremendous room for maneuver - the U.S. ruling class "had a lot of reserves" as the stalinist line went in the old days. Indeed the U.S. bourgeoisie was the _only_ major ruling class capable of what we'd call "progressive reform" in what was otherwise a deeply reactionary decade everywhere else, including in Stalin's Soviet Union. OTOH Obama is incapable of enacting even reforms that would clearly benefit large sectors of the U.S. bourgeoisie such as lowering health care costs, for current example, a reform that would advance the competitive position of U.S. capital in the world market. FDR smashed the J.P. Morgan interest; Obama further strengthens Goldman Sachs and indeed the whole finance cartel. This is not because Obama does not face the threat of an independent working class movement, but because the finance cartel is absolutely essential to the maintenance of the outsized U.S. military apparatus and therefore the global geopolitical position of the U.S. The U.S. relies on this, rather than a mighty industrial base as it did in FDR's time. So do not expect a move towards reform even in the face of the emergence of the working class threat. Instead, expect just the opposite: intensified reaction. -Matt ________________________________________________ YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
