Re: [Marxism] re: Supporting the resistance?

["Carlos A. Rivera" <cerejota@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Joaquín Bustelo" <jbustelo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>

> The point is you're ignorant and impressionistic about the political
> geography of the United States. Someone writes something in a newspaper or
> says it on TV and you *believe* it, but it ain't so.

Now I think it is you being impresionistic. You consider the bulk of the 
"Blue State" votes as anything other than objectively reactionary?  It would 
seem so.

True, subjectively, many certainly weren't. For example, a large chunk of 
people who voted Green in the last election, voted Democrat in this one. ABB 
was wrong, but it was misguided, not reactionary. Yet, to hear Kerry speak 
about a whole range of issues, from gay marriage to the War in Iraq as if he 
were a  centrist Republican, you had to have a lot of misguiding to accept 
to vote for him, specially when there were alternatives, from the utopic 
(SPUSA, WWP, even the SEP) to the realist (Greens) to voting Kerry.

My sources are not the press, but the actual results of the elections, the 
different party platforms published in their websites, the primary campaing 
of the Democrats (Again, from the published point of view of the candidates) 
and the presidential debates, some of which had record high TV audiences. 
And an actual, in depth, knowledge of how the political process varies from 
state to state including specific party differences, such as the P&J Party 
in California or the WFP in NYS and the differences at the congressional 
level within the Democrats (Gutierrez (D) from Chicago is to the right on 
certain things, but in many he is to the left of even the Greens).

55% is a record high outpouring of voters in the current period, which was 
the period I thought we were discussing. (Your tangent in this regard is 
dishonest, its not 1936 we are discussing). It also should be noted that as 
many as 2 million people were not given the vote for the fact of being 
convicted felons either in jail or in probation, in some states even after 
they have served their time. It should also be noted that the undocumented 
population, for the purpose of voting statistics is irrelevant as they don't 
vote (duh).

Yet this 45% that didn't vote, what are their political charasteristics?

Lacking qualitative data, we can only speculate.

Certainly a small percentage is people who are politically opposed to 
elections, such as non-voting socialists and certainly anarchists. Others 
are probably extreme right-wingers. The rest, well, lets just say they don't 
show up in anyone's political radar, so my money is with contentment and 
with support of the general direction of the Empire, what some people call 
apathy, and Che called (to paraphrase) "apolitical reaction". Here Junaid is 
onto something. Of course, my money could be wrong, but were is the 
qualitative data? Lacking it, we have but emprical experience, which doesn't 
point in the direction of a large subjectively pro-socialist block or one at 
least ripe for radical alternatives. Of course, it is a function of 
communists to move forward even in those bad conditions, but not by being 
thriumphalists who see a huge mass just waiting for the "right" leadership 
to move them in the "correct" direction. Gimme a break!

So you see, rather than an impressionistic view, it is a sober, reality 
based viewed, using exactly the same data you claim proves that I am being 
impressionistic. While I wouldn't describe our difference in what the data 
represents as you being "impressionistic", since you opened the door for 
such a high road of discourse, then apply the label to yourself liberally. 
While I hold my opinions to be challenged by substantial data, I won't 
accept as true differences of opinion that stem from the *same* data.

I might be wrong in opinion, but I'll pay you 100 USD if you can prove to me 
that the bulk of the votes for Kerry were "dove" votes and not reactionary 
and another 100 USD is you can prove that the 45% who didn't vote are ripe 
for the "correct" leadership to "guide them forward".

That said, I take your post to be just another example of sheer intelectual 
tangents, which seem popular in this group. Not having anything of practical 
political consequence, or worse not wanting to say that they agree with 
someone with whom they have disagreed in the past, let's go ad hominem. 
Great! Way to go! A positive advance!

So this tangent being over, can we return to the substantial point, which 
you failed to comment on, which as I recall was how to re-orient the 
anti-war movement in the USA.

To briefly re-state, my opinion is that the ultra-left "Victory to the 
Resistance" types have done much less damage to the movement in general, 
than the ABBers and their fellow travellers, the bulk of which are cowering 
behind a generalist "pacifism" and have abandoned in practice the demand for 
immediate withdrawal.

Now, you may call me impressionistic for holding this view, and i'll admit 
it is emprical, but I am much mor einterested in hearing about why it is so, 
than a necesarily speculatory exercise on the voting qualities in the USA.

sks 



_______________________________________________
Marxism mailing list
Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism