Carl Dassbach writes:
> Political spectrums are not absolute but relative. What is conservative
> at one time is moderate at another. For example, what would Cater or
> Nixon be considered today. BTW, Jimmie Cater represents the first step
> (and Clinton, the last step) in the betrayal of the "FDR" Democrats ala
> Kennedy and Johnson.

Marvelous Max writes
> To me Carter looks a lot like Clinton, maybe Obama, and Nixon looks a lot
> like both Bushes.

One could think of politicians as being like hot-air balloons. What we
see in practice is the result of a combination of the balloon's
desired movement and those of the winds.

Even though his instinct pushed him rightward, the prevailing winds at
the tail end of the 1960s pushed Nixon leftward (so he started the
EPA, OSHA, and the like). Carter or Clinton may have wanted to go
somewhat leftward, but the winds were pushing them to the right. In
fact, Clinton allegedly remarked on this fact, acidly saying that
"We're Eisenhower Republicans here. We stand for lower deficits, free
trade, and the bond market. Isn't that great?" and that  "we help the
bond market and we hurt the people who voted us in."

Here, the "winds" are a metaphor for the current political-economic
balance of power. Back in the 1960s and early 1970s, there was still
an anti-war movement and a growing environmental movement, along with
feminist and ethnic-minority movements. There was ferment among
blue-collar workers (Lordstown, 1972, etc.) Nixon had to deal with
this reality and thus had to compromise in a way that made him look
"leftist" by the standards of today's politicians (at the same time he
tried to push rightwards in a lot of other ways).

Since the 1980s, the winds have changed their direction. Starting in
the 1970s, the capitalists were upset with low profitability (and
worsening stagflation) and tried for political solutions (among other
things). This turned into a deluge of greed. They sucked all the air
out of the various "countervailing powers" (labor unions, etc.) while
most of the countervailing powers have become organizations with
mailing lists and regular fund-raisers, doing little outside of
"normal" channels. (Those forces also became tired and ossified on
their own.)  So there has  been little to counteract the rightward
flow of the wind.

So I think it's a mistake to focus on individual politicians that
much. Rather than simply blaming Jimmy Carter or Clinton for betraying
the "FDR" Democrats, we need to think about the weakness of the forces
that could have prevented their rightward flights. That means that we
have to figure out ways to change the balance of power...
-- 
Jim Devine / "Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own
way and let people talk.) -- Karl, paraphrasing Dante.
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to