[Marxism] Re: Does NYTimes finally get it?

[Brian Shannon <Brian_Shannon@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

I picked up the dead tree version this afternoon. The story is upper 
left and continues to an inside two-page spread with pictures. In the 
e-mail version I failed to notice that this is the first of two parts. 
If I have time after work tomorrow I will comment further on the 
article.

The Internet version includes more pictures and a voice over by Tim 
Golden, the lead writer, giving more details about the deaths, 
including the role of the NY Times reporters in prompting the military 
investigation.

In evaluating this article, we must start from the fact that the NY 
Times represents the liberal wing of the U.S. ruling class. It 
therefore cannot be expected to go beyond liberalism. My lead of "Does 
the NY Times Finally Get It?" should not be interpreted as an 
announcement that the Times has gone beyond liberalism and is part of 
some broader consistent antiwar coalition.

Frankly, my wording for the lead was not entirely apt. It should have 
been closer to asking whether this article indicated a turn by the 
liberal wing of the ruling class.

As in the period of the Pentagon Papers, today elements of the ruling 
class need to find a way to ideologically and politically separate 
themselves from a failed policy. They have to protect their own class, 
i.e., to strengthen it by moving away from the policy and/or the 
individuals who now have the onus of having created the difficulty.

The primary mechanism is to shift to a different party. During the 
Korean War, it helped to bring "I will go to Korea" Eisenhower into 
office. But there are other solutions, including staying partly with 
those in power, while shifting some aspects of the policy. Bush himself 
is shameless or stupid enough to move from one position to another 
without every acknowledging a mistake.

It appears to me that the handling of this article, along with the 
sight of U.S. military leaders openly acknowledging that things are not 
going well, indicates a shift in the Iraq War strategy.

This does not mean withdrawal. While Bush and Cheney continue their 
right-wing attack on the governmental bureaucracy, we can expect a more 
traditional international military/diplomatic offensive involving 
Europe, Russia, China, and Arab bourgeois nations. So far as the Arab 
nations are concerned, this has already begun.

The initial strategy of the neo-cons was to seize Iraq and use it as a 
power base for the U.S. in the Middle East. This was also the 
Clinton/Gore/Kerry et al plan. 9/11 meant that they didn't even have to 
quibble over it. They may not have liked Bush's style, but he got 
things done. And the onus for any mistakes was on him and the neo-cons.

It was not just a neo-con strategy. Clinton embraced "regime change" as 
well. The leading political figures in and for the U.S. ruling class 
were opposed to European and Russian overtures to Saddam Hussein. They 
now have to backtrack. To create a political settlement in Iraq, they 
will have to share some of the geopolitical, military, and economic 
gains they still hope for.

What we don’t know is how much room there is to do this.

- - -

Having apologized for my overly sanguine lead, I also need to explain 
my use of the word “liberal.”

I don't favor using it as a catchall term to include people like Hilary 
Clinton, Kerry, and others, as well as those who vote for them. Liberal 
wing of the ruling class is not the same as "liberals." We are stuck 
with the terminology that most people understand.

Most of the people that I know are liberals--they support the lesser of 
two evils and are against “wasting their vote” for an independent 
candidate that would “spoil” the chance of candidates that throw them a 
bone.

Some are pro-capitalist liberals, some aren’t. Some haven’t thought 
about it, or at least haven’t thought about it for a long time.

We need a political strategy to break this up. Arguing for Proportional 
Representation along with Instant Runoff Voting will be key ingredients 
in this strategy.


Brian Shannon


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