Goldwater moving in next door

Hugh Rodwell m-14970 at mailbox.swipnet.se
Sat Oct 5 18:43:24 MDT 1996


On unity-list David McR wrote:

>>Goldwater for Clinton. My God - you folks in Scandanavia and
>>England have no idea how funny this seems to some of us here.

Why? Because we are assumed to be as nationally blinkered as the bourgeois
media in the States?

And how come Clinton is seen as *left* as opposed to Goldwater's *right*?

I suppose it's the same kind of thing as Ted Heath's becoming a leftie
compared to Thatcher. So what's new?

With respect to democratic demands, liberalism and that kind of thing, Bob
Dylan put the democratic position as follows:

        I'm liberal but to a degree --
        I want *everybody* to be free.

Now this line is completely incompatible with today's bourgeois democracy,
taken seriously it implies revolutionary change in our society. Socialist
revolutionary change. And if you get socialist revolutionary change, why
stop at merely democratic demands?

So why all the pissing around the pot? Why all the tittle-tattle about
figures in the bourgeois democratic establishment who are never ever ever
going to realize a single democratic demand that actually satisfies the
needs of the whole people?

Cheers,

Hugh




     --- from list marxism at lists.village.virginia.edu ---




More information about the Marxism mailing list