Re: Re: [Marxism] Green party talk becoming more mainstream

[<hari.kumar@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Wed, 21 Jun 2006 18:09:30 -0400
From: Marvin Gandall <marvgandall@xxxxxxxxxxxx>

Marvin wrote:
> Friedman's casual attitude about the emergence >of a third party is what 
> interested me. It would >seem to indicate a high degree of confidence by >the 
> American bourgeosie that, in current >conditions, such a party could be 
> contained and >coopted and even, as Friedman suggests, perform a >necessary 
> function as gadfly and critic of the >two major parties which he and a 
> growing number >of others close to the centres of power think >have become 
> too complacent about the need for >serious environmental, social, and foreign 
> policy >reform. The NDP is patronized in a similar way in >Canada. "

Query:
I realise this is slightly off-topic..
However:

The sense from your description of the NDP - is of a much more truly 
'independent' force that should not be 'patronised' than perhaps warranted.

If that is what you meant to point to, and it is not a mis-reading on my part - 
it does not tally with a more 'orthodox' read of social-democracy.

I would simply question that interpretation.           I do  not see how the 
NDP has behaved to foster a true challenge to Canadian capital.                 
               The term 'patronising' - implies more of a "tolerance of" thatn 
is warranted.
Rather more characteristic terms might be "an active fostering of", to serve as 
a "convenient and ultimately 'harmless' side-line for angry disgruntled ones".

I may have misunderstood your intent in a casual phrase.
If so - my apologies.

Hari



________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism