Dear Michael: "You ask why there isn't a backlash?" Perhaps Ken or others from C should chip in, but I would suggest this: (i) There is still enough 'heft' in the health care services to carry the majority of people, & it just has not dug into enough people's real health status as yet; that is especially enough of the "middle class". Especially we will ignore the effects on the Native Americans/Indian peoples etc. [I mean they "don't really count do they?"] (ii) There is NO party worth its weight as a genuine vehicle of the people's rights. You understand of course, that there is no ML-ist party - but .... I mean for crying out loud - There is not even anything of a social-reformist/social-democratic force that has exerted itself adequately in shape/size/form - for many years. (iii) Thus the eruptions of protest that DO occur - & they DO: (e.g.; Witness; immense public shows in Alberta where the reactionaries have proceeded further perhaps than anywhere else in Canada; Witness: in BC where a very large public workers strike was reported in PEN_l by some correspondents; Witness: in Nova Scotia ditto etc......) are ultimately fizzling out. There is simply NO party that can/will/wants to build on these movements and is willing to use them as a vehicle to crush capital. Heck - even crush the "worst manifestations of capital". (iv) The "Objective factors" are all there. What is lacking is the "Subjective" factor. But then you would expect this old Stalinist salt to say that - wouldn't you? Yeah yeah - hackneyed crap eh? What do Ken & the other Canucks on the list say? (v) - But really - the question is much better phrased to the Americans on the list - why the hell have they not erupted? I mean the US health care system sucks - sooooooooo much worse than the Canadian. Yet............??? I suggest that it is for the same reason..... i.e.: The lack of the subjective factor. I know that does not sit well with some. However... that is just my little old view. H
