Why antiwar fighters should not be fazed by election results
Jose G. Perez
jgperez at netzero.net
Thu Nov 7 19:05:25 MST 2002
The broad-ranging statement by ANSWER on the elections makes a number of
good points. Like, Duh...
Unfortunately, it *also* contains some absolutely cretinous reformist
dribble, like that the elections could have been a referendum of the war,
but, gee, the vote in October by Congress changed all that.
What's the matter with Worker's World? Has their collective mind really
turned into mush?
Do they really think "It is no wonder that voters had an extremely difficult
time differentiating between the pro-war program of the Republicans and that
articulated by the Democratic Party leadership," *pretending* the Democrats
and Republicans represent two different interests, when any idiot can see
BOTH parties serve exactly the SAME class interests? Does anyone here REALLY
think if Al Gore had been elected President by the Supreme Court it would
have made the slightest bit of difference?
I say what's the matter with Workers World because THIS kind of broad
ranging statement IMHO compromises them politically. They play the leading
role in ANSWER, they need to answer for it. Methinks there is an adaptation
here, albeit just a verbal one, but an adaptation nevertheless.
And it makes me feel even more uncomfortable with this "People's Antiwar
Referendum" *gimmick.* Gee, couldn't we come up with a more passive, more
demobilizing, more atomizing, more non-struggle tactic than clicking on a
web link? How about telling everyone to go home and pray for peace?
"Register your vote by..." Nice. In a week when about 2/3rds of the American
people showed they are of sound mind and body by paying all the attention to
the bourgeois electoral farce that it deserves, here these comrades show how
much they appreciate and identify with the alienation of the American people
from the legitimizing institutions of bourgeois rule by ... breaking out the
red-white-and-blue bunting and aping the bourgeois electoral farce.
(And, yes, dear comrades from ANSWER, is is 2/3rds of the voting age
population that did not vote, not "Two thirds of registered voters." Saying
"registered voters" tells those who know better that the drafters of the
statement were well beyond their depth, flailing about cluelessly.)
Politics is not about static positions, statements, petitions. It is about
*tone* and *stance*, "attitude," and how those things intersect with
political *motion* in the population. If you add up all the votes of all the
winning candidates for the House you'll see that this Congress represents at
most 20% of the voting age population, and even if you include all the votes
for the losers, you'd be hard-pressed to get much past 30%. This year there
is no way to prove it, because of the exit poll fiasco by ALL the major news
organizations, but anyone who has taken the time to EXAMINE and ANALYZE the
exit polls of previous elections knows who voted. The voters are much
whiter, much richer, much more employed, much older and much more
conservative than the voting age population as a whole.
It is very nice that you have denounced the attempt by the bourgeois press
and politicos to present this as some sort of ersatz "mandate." It would be
even nicer if in the next breadth you didn't fall into aping bourgeois
electoral cretinism by depicting an online petition as a "vote."
That because the antiwar movement should try to relate to, in the way it
presents its arguments and propaganda, to the feelings, concerns and world
outlook of the non voters. Frankly, MOST Americans, especially Blacks,
Hispanics, immigrants, the less-privileged layers of the working class,
think the elections are a crock that have nothing to do with them. Our
language, tone, stance, and tactics should seek to link up with THAT
sentiment, and not give in even a micrometer to the chorus of bourgeois
hypocrites chastising us from the book tube for failing to vote.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Fred Feldman" <ffeldman at bellatlantic.net>
To: "107" <107disc at yahoogroups.com>; "620" <620peace at yahoogroups.com>;
"antiwar network" <nsan at lists.riseup.net>; "campus_peace"
<campus_peace at yahoogroups.com>; "marxmail" <marxism at lists.panix.com>;
"cubanews" <CubaNews at yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2002 2:53 AM
Subject: Why antiwar fighters should not be fazed by election results
PLEASE clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.
More information about the Marxism