Louis:
I am clear that I misunderstood you - when you clairfy in tihs ntoe that you are not
an 'abstentinis'.
With repsects to the Green party I suppose you are quite aware of infomration on
Portside today,
that they won a signficant vote (I think in the SF area).
My apologies, I caught one
CC: 4. If a real fascist (or some new kind authoritarian populism) were to arise in
the U.S. it could not be defeated by DP politicians. It could
only be defeated by the unity of a _real_ social democratic party _and_ the 21st c.
equivalent of a communist movement. But those urging us to
support
Hari:
Well, Lenin viewed those SD parties as bourgeois parties. Certainly if
you read his writings with the
British (Dreadnought Pankhursts etc) in mind, that is clearly the intent.
No, he did not see them as bourgeois parties. The Kadets in Russia were a
bourgeois party, as are the Republican
Carrol writes:
But those urging us to
support the DP this year are telling us to postpone once more the effort
to build a mass left movement. Supporting the DP intead of focusing on
our real task of mass-movement building can leave the u.s. helpless
against fascism down the road.
in the US at
It seems to me, following on Jim Ds comments below, that our job in
this election period should be to develop criteria for people to use
when thinking about voting. In other words, we need to get working
people to see that a strong and accountable public sector is desirable
and feasible.
This way we do not become captive to a candidate and his political
shifts. This is how I understand the meaning of an anybody but Bush
movement. We build a movement with criteria and then accept the need
to vote for the democratic candidate that best measures up. In this
way we are building
Lou Proyect said:
Matt Gonzalez was a lifelong Democrat, but decided to run as a
Green in SF. He got 47 percent of the vote, a very good indication
of what is possible.
John Gulick says:
Regardless of what disposition Marxists, radicals, left-liberals, etc. take
toward electoral politics in
Lou Proyect said:
Matt Gonzalez was a lifelong Democrat, but decided to run as a
Green in SF. He got 47 percent of the vote, a very good indication
of what is possible.
John Gulick says:
Regardless of what disposition Marxists, radicals, left-liberals, etc. take
toward electoral politics in
I trust this is not too old a thread to allow further comment.
I know that PEN-ers may be allergic to the name, but still - I was
surprised that the old Leninist adage of Support them (=social
democracy) like a rope supports a hanged man - did not come up. Though
the intent of Jim C's return to
Hari:
However, I cannot
believe that some modification of this view does not allow mobilisation
behind a non-SD-ic but liberal candidate - i.e. in the circus of all
electoral circuses, those taking place in the USA [Oh sorry, I forgot
India - they are the best cirucses I have seen].
But that's
Lou asked the key question about the election.
Louis Proyect wrote:
It is obvious that a Dean
presidency will not be as bad as a Bush presidency, but in terms of the
real material conditions of life, the differences will have no effect.
Unemployment, bad health, rotten schools, shabby
It's off with Gramsci and on with Che. . . .l love them both, but as I re-read Jon Anderson's 1997 book on Che and the Cuban revolution. . .and as I read deeper into how Lenin made the Russian revolution. . .and as I reflect on how the IRA, Sandinistas and Vietnamese made their revolutions
Michael Perelman writes:
What would have happened if Gore had been president on September 11? We have
had to prove his manhood and to act more precipitously than Bush?
we should remember that it was a Democrat (Truman) who started the Cold War and the
McCarthyite loyalty checks. The the GOP --
Hari Kumar wrote:
I trust this is not too old a thread to allow further comment.
I know that PEN-ers may be allergic to the name, but still - I was
surprised that the old Leninist adage of Support them (=social
democracy) like a rope supports a hanged man - did not come up. Though
the intent
CC wrote:
George Bush is NOT a fascist (he may be worse in some ways, but he is
not remotely the leader of a fascist movement)
So Ubu Potus is *worse* than a fascist! And who is it who is supposed
not to care whether or not he consolidates and worsens yet further
his *worse than fascist* regime?
15 matches
Mail list logo
