[Marxism] Ralph Nader, What Will this Chronically Disillusioned, Delusional Democrat do in 2012?
markalause at gmail.com
Sun Jul 31 21:01:15 MDT 2011
Not a particularly great materialist, Pinchy . . . just your garden variety
materialist. This means in a political sense that we should take the class
struggle in the form it presents itself and try to go from there.
Conversely, it means you can't change the relationship of class forces by
chanting at it any more than you can levitate the Pentagon . . . .
For all the wind in your email, I've not seen you get beyond griping about
what others have done and offer a single concrete suggestion about how best
to maximize our impact in terms of fostering independent political action.
This is why I referred to what you're doing as whining.
Come up with a concrete proposal.
Personally, I'd not only reassert mine, but applaud the efforts of labor and
progressive forces to mount a primary challenge to Obama. This is not out
of illusions in the Democratic Party, but a recognition that such an act by
tens of thousands of workingclass Democratic voters can be their first step
towards asserting their own interests in the political sphere and can lead
That's materialism, too, of course. Not the repetition of abstract slogans
that have been chanted by the dogmatists since the 1890s to the effect of
leaving the Left where it now it.
On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 8:25 PM, Pinchy Way <pinchyway1 at aol.com> wrote:
> Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
> Mark Lause sees himself as a great materialist and anybody who says that
> Nader is a 'chronically disillusioned, delusional Democrat somehow must not
> be, just because they are not as impressed by the supposed independence from
> the Democratic Party that Mr Materialist Professor Mark has been able to see
> with his own fabulous and great materialist eyes. Sorry, Mark, but I stand
> by what I have seen in Nader, which is that he started out as a consumer
> lobbyist working among the Democrat Party politicians, continued for years
> building up his own lobbyist groups who targeted the Democratic Party
> politicians, and he in fact to this day remains just exactly such.... a
> Democratic Party lobbyist who is currently lobbying the Democrat Party to
> lean more left of nothing for him (and supposedly for all the rest of us,
> Nader originally started out as an Assistant of the Democratic Party
> Secretary of Labor, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, in fact. Today he is out
> there trying to arrange liberals to run INSIDE the Democratic Party primary
> against the Right Wing Democratic Party leader, Obama. See the materialism
> here in me, Mark? Nader is a Democrat, who pushes pushes pushes his party,
> FROM THE SUPPOSED OUTSIDE OF IT now, but the inside of it whenever and
> tomorrow! When at times nominally outside the DP haggling with the DP
> bosses, then he always always always seems somehow to return back to it,
> leaving nothing of any real independent of the DP structure behind him.
> You seem to want to wax euphoric about his supposedly all that independent
> presidential campaign of the year 2000, but what material legacy did that
> leave anybody to the Left of the Democrats? I would say that he left a
> big material ZERO organizationally for us. That's what he left behind with
> all his efforts to push the Democrats leftward in 2004, 2008, and that's
> what he will leave behind him in 2012. Mark, you don't see that though,
> all because you are so busy to strut your own materialist stuff out, and
> then label others what? Idealists? Right Wingers even? Not like
> Materialist Lause who loves Nader! Give us a break with your ego, Mark.
> You disagree with my assessment of Nader and it has absolutely nothing to do
> with you being all that materialist in your thinking and all who think
> different about Nader supposedly being something else besides that.
> The second part of Mark's main 'materialist' arguments in favor of somehow
> seeing Nader as being the great independent, is simply that if you don't see
> Nader as that, then Mark the whiner will start whining about what a whiner
> you are in his eyes. He says that I must have wanted something from
> Ralph, didn't get it, so I started to cry unlike what the great tough Macho
> Materialist Mark does! He says that I have done that in regards to Cynthia
> and Ralph both, though I have not mentioned Cynthia McKinney even just once.
> No not at all.,... He says that I am the type that would whine about just
> anybody who would not do as I would like them to do! Mark is not like
> that though, he is a MATERIALIST, while whiner Pinchy Way is most certainly
> not... yadda yadda yadda. I did not mention Cynthia at all because she has
> different politics than Nader does, that's why. Cynthia's record is an
> entirely different discussion, Mark.
> But, Mark, where have I whined about Ralph not doing what I wanted him to
> do? I merely called him what he is, which is that he is a CHRONICALLY
> DISILLUSIONED, DELUSIONAL DEMOCRAT. I didn't whine about it at all, but
> just left it as a statement of fact. However, Materialist Lause doesn't
> like the facts I present. And I'm so sorry about that, Mark. You, the
> 'materialist', can make up your facts all alone, for all I care. And you
> Mark, you seem to love the Henry Wallace campaign of 1948, but many on
> marxism list came out of a political tendency that rejected Henry Wallace as
> not being any real break from the Democratic Party. This tendency called
> for people not to bother voting for Henry Wallace, in fact. I believe that
> they were absolutely right to do so, and that the Wallace campaign was NOT
> independent of the Democrats, and just like Nader's runs for the presidency,
> Henry Wallace also left no enduring independent structures outside of the
> Democratic Party.
> How sad it is, to see these folk who came out of a political tendency that
> rejected this sort of campaigning run in the orbit of the DP like Henry
> Wallace's campaign was in 1948, who now seem so intimidated by ' marxist
> moderators' that nobody here even raises a voice on this list against doing
> that now once again with Nader! Sad. This to me, is not what democracy
> in the anti-capitalist Movement would ever look like. It kind of looks
> like what???? Certainly that not that free a discussion can happen.
> Certainly it shows that there is a lack of freedom of spirit here.
> Certainly it does not show a relaxed atmosphere where one feels free to open
> one's mouth without fear of reprisals. It's all aboard the Nader Express
> time here once again! By people who come out of a tendency that once
> rejected Henry Wallace's pretenses, and the pretenses of the CP right behind
> Send list submissions to: Marxism at greenhouse.economics.utah.edu
> Set your options at:
More information about the Marxism