Current commentary: Showdown in Wisconsin
and Defining Social Deomcracy
http://jweeks.org

http://jweeks.org/Current_Commentary.html
Until recently known as the home of whole food co-ops and alternative life 
styles,  Madison, Wisconsin is today the key battle field in a class war 
declared unilaterally by capital.  Formally at stake in the battle of Madison 
are the rights of public sector employees to bargain collectively.  In practice 
the battle is joined over the basic human right of freedom of association, 
which 
lies at the heart of a democratic society.  It is not hyperbola to describe the 
struggle in the snows of Madison to be a battle in US capital's 
counter-revolution against democracy.
            To understand the full significance of the confrontation in Madison 
it must be placed in historical context.  A progressive alliance of farmers and 
workers in Wisconsin produced Robert Marion La Follette (Fighting Bob), who was 
probably the most leftwing politician elected to major office in the United 
States.  Elected to the US House of Representatives, governor of the state, and 
US senator, La Follette was a Republican when it remain partly the party of 
Lincoln.  

            By World War I he was too progressive for either major party.  In 
1924, the year before he died, La Follette formed his own party, the 
Progressives.  He won seventeen percent of the national popular vote for 
President, running as an uncompromising enemy of corporate power.  If 100 years 
later the Republicans generated a defection to a new party, it would be 
neo-fascist (as opposed to the proto-fascism of what would remain).  


Fighting Bob's sons Philip (governor in the 1930s) and Robert Jr ("Young Bob", 
US Senator 1925-1946) formed the Wisconsin Progressive Party that briefly 
controlled state politics.  Wisconsin was a state deeply divided between 
progressive labor and reactionary capital.  In a bitter electoral defeat of 
progressive ideals, Young Bob lost the 1946 Republican primary to Joseph 
McCarthy (by 5000 votes).  McCarthy went on to defeat the Democrat in the 
general election and become perhaps the most venal US politician of the first 
half of the twentieth century.
            The current governor leading the assault on human rights in 
Wisconsin,  Scott Walker, rests comfortably in the McCarthy tradition.  To give 
credit where it is due, Walker has considerably exceed McCarthy's assault on 
human rights.  While McCarthy for the most part restricted himself to alleged 
communists and the alleged "fellow travelers" of those alleged communists, the 
neo-venal Walker has broadened the assault to the population as a whole 
(except, 
of course, capital and its agents).  

            In the state elections of 2010, those who voted in Wisconsin 
brought 
a Republican majority to both branches of the legislature, as well as the 
governor.  This would be no changing of the guard.  With the state's budget 
deficit as an excuse, Walker launched a program of savage cuts.  Had he done no 
more than this, he would have remained as singularly undistinguished as he 
certainly is.  He would have been lost in a crowd of similarly reactionary 
politicians throughout the western world, a George Osborne with a mid-west 
accent.
            Walker of Wisconsin is no commonplace reactionary.  He aspires to a 
far baser goal than budget cuts:  a frontal assault on the right of people to 
associate.  Freedom of association is the right of individuals to collectively 
express, promote, pursue and defend common interests.  While the phrase 
"freedom 
of association" does not appear in the US constitution, federal and state 
courts 
interpreted the first amendment to include it (the amendment specifies freedom 
of religion, speech, the press, assembly, and to petition the government).   

            Just thirteen months ago the US Supreme Court stuck a potentially 
fatal blow to the freedom of speech part of the first amendment.  By a 5-4 
ruling the court voided restrictions on the funding of political campaigns 
(Citizens United v. the Federal Election Commission).  This ruling granted 
capital unlimited freedom to propagandize and, by doing so, judicially reduced 
the rights of the rest of the population to freedom of speech.  The unspeakable 
Walker has his eye on another first amendment prize, the freedom of people to 
"petition the government for redress of grievances" (last clause of the first 
amendment).
            A growing number of people in the United States recognize the 
danger 
to democracy posed by Walker's bill to destroy pubic sector unions in 
Wisconsin.  Over 70,000 are suffering snow and freezing temperatures to stop 
him.  Credit should also go to the Democrats in the state senate who 
temporarily 
blocked legislative action (by preventing the senate from having a quorum).
            At stake in Wisconsin are not wages and pensions (the union has 
conceded to Walker these issues).  It is not a "labor issue".  At stake is 
political democracy.  Walker and the Wisconsin Republicans are militant 
extremists.  With the overt support of big capital, they seek the destruction 
of 
democratic government.  The demonstrators in Madison struggle against a 
reactionary vanguard that would implement its anti-democratic programme at the 
national level when it can seize the presidency.  

            For those of us living in the United Kingdom the struggle is at an 
earlier but no less dangerous stage.  Only last month the prime minister David 
Cameron told members of parliament that he intended to act "to prevent militant 
trade unions holding Britain to ransom" (Daily Mail, 13 January 2011).  Feeling 
its power on the rise, global capital is abandoning the pretense of democracy 
in 
favor of "order".  A New Order. With an old name, fascism.


      
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
  • [Pen-l] Merit Pay michael perelman
    • [Pen-l] Showdown in Wisconsin by John Weeks soula avramidis

Reply via email to