[Marxism] An analysis of the DP convention that works better than Cockburn's, in my opinion

["Charles Brown" <charlesb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Mike Friedman mikedf at amnh.org 
Tue Sep 2 19:18:18 MDT 2008 
------------------

This is exactly what hasn't happened. Since WWII, every independent
mass
radicalization that has taken place in this country has seen those
so-called "radicals within the Democratic Party" try to suck them into
the
party and thereby neutralize them. Every one. 

^^^^
CB: This is exactly, factually wrong. The Civil Rights Movement's
demands were most fully achieved by the Democrats , including Johnson,
passing not only Civil Rights statutes ,but a Constitutional Amendment
against the poll tax !. The Vietnam Peace Movement took over the Dem
Party with McGovern in 1972.  Although the Dems didn't end the war, that
powerful thrust into the Dem Party was significant in forcing the end of
the war. 

^^^^

>From the CIO to the Vietnam
anti-war movement, and beyond. All of these movements "erupted outside
and
independently of the Democratic Party." And every single one lost its
sense of political direction by succumbing to those "radicals" and
their
higher-ups, by toning-down their message in the interests of "their"
candidates, by allowing themselves to be steered into least common
denominator electoralism. And in the end, after being suckered in,
they
had ZERO impact on the DP in terms of their issues. 

^^^^
CB: Nope. McGovern was the DP presidential candidate in 1972 because
the peace movement had a lot more than zero impact on it..

The CIO was part of the movement that won the Wagner Act, legalizing
forming unions, passed by the Democratic President and Congress.
Legalizing unions was the main goal of he CIO. Before that , unions were
treated as illegal conspiracies in US law.

^^^^^^^

After labor misleaders
like Walter Reuther kissed ass in the DP, the labor movement had
Taft-Hartley shoved up their asses. 

^^^^
CB: By the Republicans, and over the veto of the Democratic President,
Truman. 

^^^^

Then there was the anti-war movement's
support for the "peace" candidates of the DP. Etc., etc., etc. Only by
remaining independent and NOT toning down their momentum and demands
have
these movements ever had an impact on either the DP or the politics in
this country.

^^^
CB: Nope. The DP sacrificed itself in the 1972 election by nominating
the peace movement's candidate, McGovern.

^^^

^^^
 Every fucking electoral year you play the same tune and
every fucking year it's the same bullshit.

^^^^^
CB: I'll tell you what's bullshit, the more I review the historical
record. It's the claim that social movements go to the DP to die.
They've gone there and succeeded, in example after example.




This message has been scanned for malware by SurfControl plc. 
www.surfcontrol.com

________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: 
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40archives.econ.utah.edu