====================================================================== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. ======================================================================
Artesian wrote (in response to the comment by Louis that running an explisitly socialist elctoral challenge to Obama would be a bad, bad, bad, idea: >I don't think it's a bad idea at all. For 60 years, >the word "socialism" has been abandoned to either >foaming attacks by the right, or the outright >stupidity of the left. This brings us to the same argument that has obsessed the left in Britain for years as to whether to form a "half way house" to chalenge New Labour or to launch a new Socilaist Party that would mount an electoral campaign. It would seem that given the realpolitik of the US there are a range of choices and all of them offer significant challenges. These are the choices as I see them. 1. A new populist party 2. A united front of existing socialist/communist organizations with a common slate of candidates for 2012 3. A 'regrouped' socialist/communist party focused on electoral work. As far as Louis is concerned, #2 & 3 are the same and equally ineffective. For Artesian and Eli, #2 is the option of choice. Even with a common candidate (with some name recognition) at the head of any of these tickets, there are formidable obstacles ahead. #1 requires a critical mass of the "Daily Kos" type disgruntled liberal to make the divorce with DP final. They will be looking for institutional support and resources that are, as of now, not there. #2 requires a working agreement, quickly, between several of the existing parties and groups commiting themselves to a untied front for 2012. Have these discussions probable or even possible? #3 requires a leap of faith (not to mention consciousness). ________________________________________________ Send list submissions to: [email protected] Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
