[Marxism] RE: Who is David Cobb? (reply to Paul H. Dillon)

Paul H. Dillon illonph at pacbell.net
Sun Jul 18 11:24:35 MDT 2004


Interesting speculations.  There is a difference between defeat and
annihalation,  however, and I think the latter word is more appropriate to
your closing comments, the former more adequate for describing the current
situation out of which the Left in America  is trying to claw itself.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Fred Feldman" <ffeldman at bellatlantic.net>
To: <marxism at lists.econ.utah.edu>
Sent: Saturday, July 17, 2004 2:08 PM
Subject: [Marxism] RE: Who is David Cobb? (reply to Paul H. Dillon)

> On Paul Dillon's question about what a Kerry Administration would look
> like on civil liberties compared to Bush.
> If Kerry pursues the war on terrorism, he will need the basic weapons
> including the Patriot Act (it will not be appealed, and remember, he
> voted for it).  He will need special prisons.  He may even need
> Guantanamo, though he might also want to junk the symbol as a cosmetic
> act.
> Remember Wilson needed repressive laws and the witch-hunt of his
> Attorney-General Mitchell Palmer.  Roosevelt, once he had decided on
> war, prosecuted socialists and communists and Black opponents of the
> war. Passed repressive legislation such as the Smith Act that is still
> on the books today. Clinton attacked democratic rights in savage ways.
> Kerry will build on the achievements of his predecessors in attacking
> civil liberties, not retreat from them.
> On birth control and abstinence, he may be less implacable than Bush,
> but I think he will continue the abstinence campaigns.  Clinton, being
> so publicly non-monastic, had more problems with this sort of thing. If
> Kerry can keep his zipper in the up position more than Clinton did, he
> may be able to pursue reactionary political goals in these areas more
> successfully. He has  said he would have voted for the Partial-Birth
> abortion law with a health modification, that is, he would have voted
> against women's right to abortion.  He has said he is willing to appoint
> anti-abortion judges if they do not overturn Roe v. Wade.  Such promises
> are not binding, of course. He says he is personally against abortion.
> He will continue the attacks on women's rights in this area.
> Clinton, in contrast to Bush Sr., said he was for women's right to
> abortion.  But at the end of his term, abortion was much less available
> to women than it had been at the end of Bush Sr's term.  And the same
> thing will be true at the end of a Kerry administration if he has his
> way
> Yes, there are always differences and they can be made more gigantic
> than they are if you ignore the fact of the common course being
> followed.  At the end of every administration since the great and
> good-for-all-of-us collapses of Johnson and Nixon, the pattern has been
> that we are worse off at the end of each presidential cycle than we were
> at the end of the next one.  They do what they can against us.  When one
> of them collapses as may be happening to Bush, the successors try to
> pick up the pieces and resume the march toward war, repression, more
> attacks on labor on social progress.
> Of course, Kerry won't mean fascism  -- despite the alarms being run in
> the Militant these days -- but then neither did Bush, nor will any of
> them until some rather huge class battles that have not taken place have
> ended in our defeat.
> Fred Feldman
> _______________________________________________
> Marxism mailing list
> Marxism at lists.econ.utah.edu
> http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism

More information about the Marxism mailing list