PEN-L
mailing list archive
[ Other Periods
| Other mailing lists
| Search
]
Date:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Thread:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Index:
[ Author
| Date
| Thread
]
Josh Frank interviews Jeff St. Clair
- To: PEN-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Josh Frank interviews Jeff St. Clair
- From: Louis Proyect <lnp3@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 16:22:18 -0400
- Comments: To: marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu
Counterpunch, August 20, 2004
Monkeywrench Hope
An Interview with Jeffrey St. Clair
By JOSHUA FRANK
(clip)
JF: Speaking of "no viable green candidate," David Cobb, the Green Party
Presidential candidate, is currently polling at 0%. If that is even
possible. His support apparently isn't even a blip on the electoral radar
screen. What do you think the ramifications will be for the Greens who,
like the Sierra Club, were founded on radical environmental ideals, but
have apparently sidelined any radical tendencies, and opted to run a
"smart-state" campaign which basically endorses John Kerry for president?
JSC: I think the Greens are kaput, a kind of group political suicide on the
order of Jonestown or that strange cult in Rancho Santa Fe who neutered
themselves, donned their black sweat suits and Nikes, & poisoned themselves
while waiting for the Hale-Bopp Comet. David Cobb is either Jim Jones or
Hale-Bopp. Take your pick. A long time ago, in a galaxy far far away, the
founding purpose of the Green party was to be a party of resistance. It was
never about party building, or getting school board candidates elected, or
anything but being a monkeywrench against a corrupt political system. Once
the Greens decided to play nice, they ceased to exist as a force of
opposition. Why be a Green when you can be a Dem? Why be a Dem when you can
be a Republican? The only choice now is not to vote. Staying home on
Election Day under these circumstances isn't apathy or laziness or
political mopery (as much as I admire all of those things) but an act of
supreme resistance, particularly against those hysterical Dems who yelp
that this is the most important election of our lifetime. Bunk.
JF: Would you say that Ralph Nader is playing nice this election season? Is
there reason to stay home with him in the race? Or is he just playing by
the rules, much like the Greens, unwilling to monkeywrench against the
political system?
JSC: I think Ralph played coy for too long. Then he was baited into running
by the very smear artists who spent three years mugging him. They really
underestimated what Ralph is made of -- which just shows that they are as
stupid as they are politically corrupt. He wasn't going to stand by and
allow a bunch of political thugs and liars to besmirch his character. Then
he was betrayed by his own political progenies, including the Green Party,
which he almost single-handedly built into a national force. Ralph is a
lawyer and a good one. He lives by rules and plays by them. He's not a
monkeywrencher or revolutionary or even a radical. He believes in ethical
government, despite all the odds. If Nader makes the Oregon ballot -- a
long shot given the slimy tactics used against him by Democrats and some
Greens -- I will happily vote for him. I take Foucault seriously. Politics
is really about power. The only power the Left (loosely speaking) enjoys
these days is the power of negation. We can't elect Nader or Camejo or
Jackson. But we can defeat bad Democrats, like Gore and Kerry. Until the
Democrats bend in our direction or a new political party rises to challenge
them. And it doesn't take much, other then courage, to make this happen --
an all out anti-war & anti-free trade campaign waged in Florida, Ohio,
Michigan, Oregon, New Hampshire, Maine and New Mexico. Those are the states
that matter. Those are the states that will force the power elite to deal
with the Left. Until that happens, the Democratic Party will continue to
move to the right, outpacing the Repubs on several issues.
JF: On what issues have the Democrats outpaced the Republicans?
JSC: It's a long list, Josh. NAFTA, welfare deform, evisceration of the
Endangered Species Act, the drug war, logging the national forests (the
ANNUAL cut under Clinton was three to four times the TOTAL cut under Bush
for his first 3 years) and, most recently, their ridiculous objections to
the Bush plan for withdrawal of US from Europe, which signals the end of NATO.
full: http://www.counterpunch.org/frank08202004.html
- Prev by Date:
Communism, Social Democracy, Liberalism, was Re: Gary Trudeau, Iraq and Nader
- Next by Date:
Re: Communism, Social Democracy, Liberalism, was Re: Gary Trudeau, Iraq and Nader
- Previous by thread:
Communism, Social Democracy, Liberalism, was Re: Gary Trudeau, Iraq and Nader
- Next by thread:
dust to dust...
- Index(es):
- Thread context:
- Difference between Nader/LaDuke 2000 and Nader/Camejo, (continued)
- John Lyndon Baines Kerry.,
Louis Proyect Fri 20 Aug 2004, 21:31 GMT
- dust to dust...,
Devine, James Fri 20 Aug 2004, 20:53 GMT
- Josh Frank interviews Jeff St. Clair,
Louis Proyect Fri 20 Aug 2004, 20:22 GMT
- Communism, Social Democracy, Liberalism, was Re: Gary Trudeau, Iraq and Nader,
Carrol Cox Fri 20 Aug 2004, 20:21 GMT
- Bringing troops home is "hawkish"?,
Louis Proyect Fri 20 Aug 2004, 19:58 GMT
- Re: Gary Trudeau, Iraq and Nader,
Devine, James Fri 20 Aug 2004, 17:27 GMT
[ Other Periods
| Other mailing lists
| Search
]