Re: [Fwd: Swans' Release: July 19, 2004]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 07/18/04 5:23 PM Michael wrote: i've a hunch that some left interest in nader is reflection of absence of actual left alternatives, as panelist at forum i attended in ann arbor said yesterday: 'he's best known option, lousy way to develop actual left alternative... I think that those who are seriously interested in building a movement and political party capable of challenging the bipartisan consensus on the domestic and foreign policy ought to be able to think beyond the specific positive and negative attributes of Ralph Nader as an individual and think about who (among Green Party leaders, rank-and-file Green Party members, non-Green Party members, etc.) is supporting him and why, what we can do to work with them, and so on. Yoshie some will, perhaps, pooh-pooh following as not serious but - imo - neither movements nor parties are built via campaigns for prez, too much time/effort/use of too limited resources, amount/kind of attention that nader gets (which is result of name recognition, not due to green party/ideas) will not contribute to either task, important green *party* work is down ballot if at all... nader received almost 3 million votes last time, will probably receive less this time for number of reasons, but those 3 million folks (and others who voted for various left alternatives in 2000) would make bigger statement by turning out en masse to a kerry inauguration with one statement - 'we're on your ass' (pelt his motorcade with 3 million eggs)... michael hoover -- Please Note: Due to Florida's very broad public records law, most written communications to or from College employees regarding College business are public records, available to the public and media upon request. Therefore, this e-mail communication may be subject to public disclosure.
[Fwd: Swans' Release: July 19, 2004]
http://www.swans.com/ July 19, 2004 -- In this issue: Note from the Editor: Barbara Ehrenreich, the gray lady filling in for Thomas Friedman at The Gray Lady, does a nice little hatchet job on Ralph Nader in It's Over, Ralph (NYT, Op-Ed, July 18). She writes, A whole slew of candidates -- Dean, Kucinich, Sharpton, Moseley Braun -- [preached Ralph's] vision of peace and social justice from within the Democratic Party; and she's thrown [her] mighty weight behind Dennis Kucinich, who, unnoticed by the media, is still soldiering on the campaign trail. Ms. Ehrenreich seems to have unnoticed another news of sorts (was not news for some of us): John Kerry's campaign headed off a showdown at the Democratic Convention by convincing Kucinich's delegates, in the name of party unity, to give up their demands that the Party's platform include the U.S. withdrawal from Iraq, the establishment of a Department of Peace, a call in favor of same-sex unions and an endorsement of Palestinians' rights. A vision of peace and social justice, Barbara? By November, she might as well vote for Bush...for the way DLC- Kerry is going, out-flanking the pResident on his right, even out- hawking him, Mr. Bush will look quite liberal indeed! Seriously, let's carry on with our civil debate between Swans' ABBers and non- ABBers: A case can and should be made for Ralph Nader, and Louis Proyect, using Greg Bates's latest book, Ralph's Revolt: The Case for Joining Nader's Rebellion and Ralph Nader's The Good Fight, makes it quite clearly. Edward Herman shows the unappetizing choices that many on the Left face and advances Ricardo Levine Morales's lizard strategy -- Elect the Flake; Evict the Snake. Eli Beckerman, addressing his fellow Greens, calls for political creativity as we stand up against the patently corrupt two party system and Kerry's brand of imperial patriarchy. And, Mr. Bush has problems of his own with his conservative base, according to Frank Wycoff's observations. Lying does not appeal to these fellows. Confronted by Power, greed and corruptible seed (Bob Dylan) and the enslaving platitudes of a Britney Spears, Phil Rockstroh offers a libation of fermented regret to all the raging ghosts haunting the soulless towers of lost potential. More prosaically, Philip Greenspan shows the practical face [or farce!] of democracy in the land of the free and the home of the brave, where corruption and cooperation between the two parties reign...which brings Richard Macintosh to resoundingly ring the alarm bell...which prompts Milo Clark, faced with the crazy people (corporations) in charge of everything, to mourn... An old acquaintance recently asked what proposals one can make for the future of the U.S. (instead of simply criticizing the system)? Well, let's see: Take Manuel García and John Blunt, for instance -- both look at the fate of the planet and our so-called civilization. García proposes 21 steps to transition to a post-petroleum world, and Blunt reviews Lester Brown's PLAN B, a plan which has very little to do with the status quo. Oh yes, our honorable correspondent added a small caveat: Any proposals that have a good chance of coming to pass... Yeah, it's a Slam Dunk for sure! A poem by Gerard Donnelly Smith and the Letters to the Editor (including John Steppling's review of the past issue) close this edition. These notes are already too long -- sorry -- but we cannot let this opportunity pass by the wayside: Baby Bush was in Florida last week and charged Fidel Castro that The dictator welcomes sex tourism [in Cuba]. Hmm, that speech would be welcome in Nevada, would it not? What other sins will the dictator be accused of by the Emperor -- gambling and casinos, like in the time of Baptista (another great Democrat!)...or all over the USA today? Meanwhile, call girls are congregating in Boston and New York for another blockbuster Convention extravaganza... As always, please form your OWN opinion, and let your friends (and foes) know about Swans. * Here are the links to all the pieces: http://www.swans.com/library/art10/lproy17.html The Case for Nader-Camejo - by Louis Proyect http://www.swans.com/library/art10/herman13.html The Left And The Election Choices - by Edward S. Herman http://www.swans.com/library/art10/elib017.html Whose Imperial Patriarchy? - by Eli Beckerman http://www.swans.com/library/art10/flw021.html Bush Lied! - by Frank Wycoff http://www.swans.com/library/art10/procks31.html Confronting The Towering Lies Of Empire: A Eulogy - by Phil Rockstroh http://www.swans.com/library/art10/pgreen46.html Legislative Process In The US Two-Party System - by Philip Greenspan http://www.swans.com/library/art10/rmac25.html Courage - by Richard Macintosh http://www.swans.com/library/art10/mgc133.html Welcome To The Polyculture! - by Milo Clark http://www.swans.com/library/art10/mgarci18.html Thirsty Invaders, Chasing Heat - by Manuel Garcia, Jr.
Re: [Fwd: Swans' Release: July 19, 2004]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 07/18/04 3:46 PM http://www.swans.com/ July 19, 2004 -- In this issue: http://www.swans.com/library/art10/lproy17.html The Case for Nader-Camejo - by Louis Proyect Unlike the DLC-backed candidates of recent years, Nader is not afraid to represent himself as an old-fashioned trade union advocate. He writes: Whether workers unionize makes a big difference in their compensation and treatment. The Economics Policy Institute reports that unionization provides a 28 percent wage premium to workers -- meaning the same person in the same job, on average, will earn 11.5 percent more if the job is unionized -- and a much larger edge in the area of benefits (more than 100 percent for insurance, nearly 200 percent for pensions). i don't think my criticisms of nader are liberal but i guess some would disagree... i've a hunch that some left interest in nader is reflection of absence of actual left alternatives, as panelist at forum i attended in ann arbor said yesterday: 'he's best known option, lousy way to develop actual left alternative... another panelist referred with reverence to eugene debs, well i dig debs too but real importance at that time was neither his 6% of prez vote in 1912 or million votes he got in 1920 while in prison, more significant was over 1300 - mostly local - elected socialists prior to ww1... nader's advocacy of old-fashioned trade unionism (gompersism? business unionism?) apparently stops with those who've worked for him over years if accounts i've read about organizing at public citizen and multinational monitor are accurate... we've really had enough 'party of person' candidacies/parties... michael hoover -- Please Note: Due to Florida's very broad public records law, most written communications to or from College employees regarding College business are public records, available to the public and media upon request. Therefore, this e-mail communication may be subject to public disclosure.
Re: [Fwd: Swans' Release: July 19, 2004]
Michael Hoover wrote: another panelist referred with reverence to eugene debs, well i dig debs too but real importance at that time was neither his 6% of prez vote in 1912 or million votes he got in 1920 while in prison, more significant was over 1300 - mostly local - elected socialists prior to ww1... I think it would be deeply reactionary to back somebody like Nader if another Eugene V. Debs was available. Politics is the art, however, of knowing what to do next. nader's advocacy of old-fashioned trade unionism (gompersism? business unionism?) apparently stops with those who've worked for him over years if accounts i've read about organizing at public citizen and multinational monitor are accurate... The race is not between Ralph Nader and our ideals. In such a race, the ideals will always come in first. The challenge remains as ever to construct an alternative to the 2-party system. Nothing permanent may come out of the Nader-Camejo bid, but it takes an enormous amount of guts to stand up to the liberal establishment as Nader does. I don't Michael pays sufficient recognition to this. we've really had enough 'party of person' candidacies/parties... michael hoover I don't think this is what it is about. Our problem is not parties in general but the specific capitalist political machine in the USA which is an obstacle to the construction of a mass movement. Whatever Nader did wrong to his own employees, he put himself and his resources at the disposal of the Seattle anti-globalization protest. That's not what any Democratic Party presidential candidate ever did. -- Marxism list: www.marxmail.org
Re: [Fwd: Swans' Release: July 19, 2004]
Michael wrote: i've a hunch that some left interest in nader is reflection of absence of actual left alternatives, as panelist at forum i attended in ann arbor said yesterday: 'he's best known option, lousy way to develop actual left alternative... I think that those who are seriously interested in building a movement and political party capable of challenging the bipartisan consensus on the domestic and foreign policy ought to be able to think beyond the specific positive and negative attributes of Ralph Nader as an individual and think about who (among Green Party leaders, rank-and-file Green Party members, non-Green Party members, etc.) is supporting him and why, what we can do to work with them, and so on. -- Yoshie * Critical Montages: http://montages.blogspot.com/ * Greens for Nader: http://greensfornader.net/ * Bring Them Home Now! http://www.bringthemhomenow.org/ * Calendars of Events in Columbus: http://sif.org.ohio-state.edu/calendar.html, http://www.freepress.org/calendar.php, http://www.cpanews.org/ * Student International Forum: http://sif.org.ohio-state.edu/ * Committee for Justice in Palestine: http://www.osudivest.org/ * Al-Awda-Ohio: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Al-Awda-Ohio * Solidarity: http://www.solidarity-us.org/
Re: [Fwd: Swans' Release: July 19, 2004]
Michael wrote: i've a hunch that some left interest in nader is reflection of absence of actual left alternatives, as panelist at forum i attended in ann arbor said yesterday: 'he's best known option, lousy way to develop actual left alternative... I think that those who are seriously interested in building a movement and political party capable of challenging the bipartisan consensus on the domestic and foreign policy ought to be able to think beyond the specific positive and negative attributes of Ralph Nader as an individual and think about who (among Green Party leaders, rank-and-file Green Party members, non-Green Party members, etc.) is supporting him and why, what we can do to work with them, and so on. Response Jim C: The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything. (Josef Stalin)
Re: [Fwd: Swans' Release: July 19, 2004]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 07/18/04 4:33 PM Michael Hoover wrote: another panelist referred with reverence to eugene debs, well i dig debs too but real importance at that time was neither his 6% of prez vote in 1912 or million votes he got in 1920 while in prison, more significant was over 1300 - mostly local - elected socialists prior to ww1... I think it would be deeply reactionary to back somebody like Nader if another Eugene V. Debs was available. Politics is the art, however, of knowing what to do next. your comment suggests that you missed my point which was not about prez elections... nader's advocacy of old-fashioned trade unionism (gompersism? business unionism?) apparently stops with those who've worked for him over years if accounts i've read about organizing at public citizen and multinational monitor are accurate... The race is not between Ralph Nader and our ideals. In such a race, the ideals will always come in first. The challenge remains as ever to construct an alternative to the 2-party system. Nothing permanent may come out of the Nader-Camejo bid, but it takes an enormous amount of guts to stand up to the liberal establishment as Nader does. I don't Michael pays sufficient recognition to this. nader is curmudgeon so bucking liberal establishment (whatever that is) or any other establishment comes with territory, so voting for nader is what folks should know to do next... we've really had enough 'party of person' candidacies/parties... michael hoover I don't think this is what it is about. Our problem is not parties in general but the specific capitalist political machine in the USA which is an obstacle to the construction of a mass movement. Whatever Nader did wrong to his own employees, he put himself and his resources at the disposal of the Seattle anti-globalization protest. That's not what any Democratic Party presidential candidate ever did. ah, rat choice, any event, i''ve not been debating nader or any candidate for that matter vs dems... michael hoover (who voted for camejo when he ran for prez in 76 and probably hasn't known what to do next ever since) -- Please Note: Due to Florida's very broad public records law, most written communications to or from College employees regarding College business are public records, available to the public and media upon request. Therefore, this e-mail communication may be subject to public disclosure.
Re: [Fwd: Swans' Release: July 19, 2004]
I've stay out of this discussion, to everybody's relief (and my own), but is it possible that anyone can really endorse voting for a national Democratic candidate as progressive, or even the lesser evil? I guess so, but it takes a complete disavowal of history to do so. It takes a deliberate denial of reality. Ask a simple question: Are the Democratic Party and its national candidates calling for immediate, unconditional withdrawal from Iraq? No. I'm sure Kerry has a plan for disengagement. So did Nixon, and that plan precipitated more deaths. Because it isn't this or that candidate of the bourgeois order that matters. It is the need of the order itself that dictates war and the continuation of war. The first requirement for any step forward is rupturing the two party continuum-- preferably on a directly labor/class basis, but in the absence of that-- the next best thing-- the lesser good. Why not give the lesser good the same chance as the lesser evil?
Re: [Fwd: Swans' Release: July 19, 2004]
In a message dated 7/18/2004 5:05:30 PM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I've stay out of this discussion, to everybody's relief (and my own), but is it possible that anyone can really endorse voting for a national Democratic candidate as progressive, or even the lesser evil? I guess so, but it takes a complete disavowal of history to do so. It takes a deliberate denial of reality. Ask a simple question: Are the Democratic Party and its national candidates calling for immediate, unconditional withdrawal from Iraq? No. Reply I believe that voting for the lesser of two evils is also driven by fear and means endorsing the evil you happen to see as "less." An enormous section of society - the working class, that actually votes . . . is scared to death. Voting for the lesser of two evils means that the lesser evil can prevail. Not voting . . . from the perspective of the lesser of two evils reality, means that the evil that is not less . . . wins. We have to face our fears in society. Breaking with the two party system in its actual mechanics means that the greater evil is going to momentarily triumph. This prospect frightens the hell out of the middle classes and is something I have thought about since our "Vote Communist Campaigns" in 1976 and 1978 - Detroit. There is no other path available. The question deepens if you are the sorry bloke - with Red credentials, assigned or self assigned, to work in the electoral arena. Do you break your connection with the people who you are working with . . . by militantly opposing Kerry and advocating for Nader? No . . . you better not. The communists, militant leftists and progressives . . . in fact refuse . . . refuse . . . to break their connection with a mass of people involved in the electoral arena and we should understand this process. Are they right? They most certainly are not wrong. Personally, I will vote for a dead man . . . an American tradition, before I vote for Bush Jr. or Kerry . . . meaning I will write in Lenin's name on the freaking ballot. And urge everyone I know to vote for Lenin or Abe Lincoln. But . . . I am not currently involved in the mechanics of this electoral work although I took part in it for the better part of a decade. The social democratic left fronting as communists says . . . "Melvin P. don't understand class and the mechanics of the class struggle and reaction." This is not true and in fact we ushered in the new political frameworks in which the current political struggle in America is evolving. These are strange days . . . but we have been here before. Michael Moore could probably get more voters than Nader. You and I could run for president and vice president and probably get more votes than Nader without a nation wide electoral apparatus because the thinking of the diverse peoples of American is in flux. Then some knucklehead would scream to the high heavens that you and I caused reaction to win. You wrote about a year ago about the prospect of enlarging the coup that the Bush Jr. grouping carried out in 2000 . . . as the standard for operations in the electoral arena for 2004 . . . and I did not take this lightly. This is a real threat and your vision on this matter should be documented for the historical record. Bottom line is that communist cannot support Kerry . . . and those comrades laboring in the electoral arena can carry out policy as they see fit . . . but must never raise their specific work to a level of strategy. Under no conditions can the connection with our diverse people be broken and this is going to be a complex task. Pass out your communist propaganda and do not beat people over the head. We have discussed what is taking place and the move in Florida that disfranchised thousands of African Americans has gone nation wide and is the prelude to disfranchising millions of Anglo-Americans . . . "whose names" are suspect. Even this is not enough for the Bush clique and the coup is in the wings waiting. I endorsed the "anybody but Bush campaign" in 2003 and stated that this form of campaigning must be discarded in January 2004 and another political equation and consolidation be fought for. This is because I have personally been involved in elections as candidate and broad electoral politics. An election is a living things with its own logic and law systems and the "party line" does not mean we do not fight out the day to day battle and the shifts . . . fissures . . . and divisions that always take place as a product of any election. The coup you spoke of - damn near a year ago . . . is being fought for in front of our eyes. I aint scared and the game is played out at the highest level. Melvin P.
Re: [Fwd: Swans' Release: July 19, 2004]
In a message dated 7/18/2004 4:33:01 PM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Response Jim C: "The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything." (Josef Stalin) Comment This is true and how it playsitself out in real life and real time is the substance of the class struggle and the art of politics. The year was 1968 - a little over a year from the 1967 rebellion in Detroit. It was hot . . . man. Year later Stevie Wonder would create his "Hotter than July" album. "From the park I hear rhythm. Marlye's hot on the box. Tonight there will be a party . . . on the corner at the end of the block And didn't you know U . . . would be jamming until the break of dawn. They want us to do their fighting. But our answer today Is to let all our worries like the breeze in the summer slip away." Ok! Dig . . . September 1968 was an election for Trustee at the Dodge Main Local Union. We field a candidate . . . Ron March. Our slogan was not the dictatorship of the proletariat or workers control nut. . . "March with March." We knew we had won the election and had challengers to oversee the counting of votes . . . in the run off election because we kicked ass September 26 and the run-off election was October 3, 1968. We fought out way into the run off. OK . . . when the polls closed we started celebrating everybody loved us . . . or at least the overwhelming voting majority. The local police entered the Local Union and commenced to kicking our nature ass . . . Billy club and all. Naturally we fought back and drove the mutherfuckers out of the Local Union onto the street . . . where there are hoards of workers ready for combat. That is when they hit us with the tear gas and came back into the local union and literally stole the ballot boxes. They took the Ballot boxes and we thought they were simply there to kick our asses . . . no problem . . . because if you are scared to fight the police . . . I even don't want your fucking vote. The Police stole all the ballot boxes and took them to the Police Station overnight to "secure theintegrity of the election! " The next day the ballots were totaled and we lost. What kind of shit is that? In other words when a real third force enter the electoral arena we have to be organized with soft ware programmers that can ensure the integrity of the elections and check all the machines and vote counts. It is more of us than them so this is not hard to do in the future. This happened in 1968 and by the time of the "Vote Communist Campaigns in 1976 and 1978" we were battle hardened . . . and had . . . mutherfuckers everywhere. The challengers had relief people and the relief people had their relief. We were told when the votes were counted that we lost by a nose in 1978. Wait until our next campaigns. Melvin P.
Re: [Fwd: Swans' Release: July 19, 2004]
sartesian wrote: I've stay out of this discussion, to everybody's relief (and my own), but is it possible that anyone can really endorse voting for a national Democratic candidate as progressive, or even the lesser evil? I guess so, but it takes a complete disavowal of history to do so. It takes a deliberate denial of reality. Ask a simple question: Are the Democratic Party and its national candidates calling for immediate, unconditional withdrawal from Iraq? I couldn't conceive of myself as voting for a DP candidate (even for a Wellstone or an Obama or a Hightower), because I cannot conceive of any future for the left in the u.s. until the break with DP is final and uncompromising. But I know many people who are committed to the struggle for unconditional withdrawal from Iraq and _also_ immovably attached, _for the present_, to supporting the DP. I make my personal position known to these people. (I'm referring to the local anti-war group.) I don't think it would be useful to future relations to make a big fuss about it. There is also a handful of people on these lists (including the marxism list) who are equally committed to struggle against the Occupation but in whose judgment it is proper to work to defeat Bush this fall. I think they are wrong, but I don't think it is correct to accuse them of a deliberate denial of reality. If Kerry wins, he will make Nader supporters and other leftists look like prophets. If Bush wins, the Democrats in Congress will continue to support his policies, and we'll still look like prophets. Carrol
