There's a parallel discussion about whether the electorate is liberal or
"center-right".
Net activists are saying the election proves it isn't because they want to
claim a mandate for liberal policies. This goes along with inflating
the liberal implications
of Obama's zen-like pronouncements. More to the point is where events
can push the
next Administration.
A little materialist analysis, please!
Sandwichman wrote:
Lou,
Before Lincoln's election, Wendell Phillips referred to him as the
"slave-hound of Illinois." After his election, he said the following:
"It is the moral effect of this victory, not anything which his
administration can or will do, that gives value to this success. Not
an Abolitionist, hardly an antislavery man, Mr. Lincoln consents to
represent an antislavery idea. A pawn on the political chessboard, his
value is in his position; with fair effort, we may soon change him for
a knight, bishop, or queen, and sweep the board. (Applause) …The
Republican party have undertaken a problem, the solution of which will
force them to our position…."
It was not until 1863 that Lincoln was won over to the cause
emancipation. Until then he prosecuted the Civil War to preserve the
Union, NOT TO FREE THE SLAVES. It is not the intention of Obama and
the Democrats to emancipate wage labor. But they have "undertaken a
problem, the solution of which will force them to our position..."
On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 8:00 PM, Louis Proyect <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Zinn wrote:
Obama has more in common with Jefferson Davis since wage slavery is the
chattel slavery of our epoch.
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
