Re: Forwarded from Anthony (Bush victory)

[Carrol Cox <cbcox@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Louis Proyect wrote:

> Hi Lou:
>
> A few preliminary thoughts in the aftermath of the Bush victory.
>
> I think it is clear that the bourgeoisie has closed ranks to cut short the
> unfolding constitutional crisis.
>
> It is not clear whether, and how much, they have succeeded.
>
> Here are some questions we should try to answer?
>
> 1. Why did they go to the brink in the first place?
>
> 2. Will the conflict within their ranks boil over - despite the deal they
> made?
>
> 3. What was the deal they made behind closed doors anyway? (For certainly
> there is one.)

A good deal of marxist commentary on the election (before and
after) is incoherent. On the one hand the claim was made before
the election that one should either vote for a third party or cast
a blank ballot (or not vote at all). The grounds for this was/is the
proposition that under present conditions the capitalist class is
unified and there are no significant intra-capitalist breaks. (*Of
Course* there is always all the conflicts which a competitive system
generates, but these are a constant. There is no issue today that
signficantly divides the capitalist class as a class.) Now we are
being told that the presidential election and the disputes which
followed represent a serious rift withing the capitalist class, and
that the left should exploit that rift.

I see no evidence for this whatever. I see intense quarrels within
the *political* 'class,' as there was at the time of Watergate or
in the election of 1912 when T. Roosevelt split from the Republican
Party and threw the election to the super-imperialist and racist
Wilson. It just does not make sense for the left to constitute
itself as a propagator of drama reviews for whatever show the
capitalist class is currently putting on for the delectation of the
masses. The conflict *after* the election was no deeper than
the conflict *before* the election. If we did not consider the
conflict serious then, why should we chnge our minds because
this particular election showed up a minor glitch (and it *is*
a minor glitch) in the machinery of government.

The headline writer for this morning's Chicago Tribune has a
muich better grasp of political reality than do those leftists who
are propounding various excited theories on the SC decision:
The headline (5 lines) goes as follows:

Analysis
Historic race
reaffirms
durable U.S.
democracy

That sums up the political  impact of this election. Leftists still
have our work cut out for us, and it isn't as drama critics.

Carrol