Re: [OPE-L] a comment on John's answers

[Gerald_A_Levy@xxxxxxx]

Title: Re: [OPE-L] further response to John Holloway

Hi John:

 

A quick question.

 

Yesterday you wrote:

 

> [...] Firstly, I do not support Lopez Obrador.  I said I opposed his

> exclusion (desafuero), a very different matter -- if all politicians

> had been excluded, I would have been delighted, but obviously that

> was not the case.

 

Last Thursday (the 19th) you wrote:

 

>   I think that the reduction of poverty is desperately urgent, especially

> and palpably in Latin America (elsewhere too, but more obviously here).

> For that reason I would probably support any government that I thought

> was seriously committed to achieving this. I marched against the exclusion

> of LÃpez Obrador and I may possibly vote for him next year. At the same

> time, I recognise that any government that does not seek to eliminate

> capitalism will probably achieve very limited results in the reduction of

> poverty and will be forced to take part in promoting conditions favourable

> for the accumulation of capital, with all the very real violence that that entails.

> If, then, I decide to vote for LÃpez Obrador, it would be very much on the

> basis of supporting the lesser (but possibly significantly lesser) of two evils.

 

 

I don't understand how your comment yesterday was consistent with what

you wrote last  Thursday:  aren't you suggesting in the latter that you

*might* support Obrador in the election by voting for him?  The reason you

are suggesting (that he might be a lesser evil) is different from saying that

you oppose his exclusion, isn't it?

 

In solidarity, Jerry