[Marxism] Flectcher blather

Dayne Goodwin daynegoodwin at gmail.com
Thu Feb 28 09:43:57 MST 2013


'Progressive' Obama planned deep budget cuts all along
by Jeffrey Sachs
Financial Times 2/28/13
<http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/0ed2ad18-80f4-11e2-9fae-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2MDENGhYi>
[have to register]

The Sequestering of Barack Obama
by Robert Kuttner
The American Prospect  2/26/12
<http://prospect.org/article/sequestering-barack-obama>



On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 9:01 AM, Mark Lause <markalause at gmail.com> wrote:
> ======================================================================
> Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
> ======================================================================
>
>
> When it comes to being irrelevant, we have something to learn from the experts.
>
> To state the obvious, the level of American politics has reached the
> point where labels are usually meaningless. So we have a  a president
> with a Nixonian domestic agenda and Dubya's militarism called a
> "socialist' (and simultaneously all sorts of other things.)
>
> So it is that you have "progressives" who oppose any electoral
> presence independent of the Democrats and they don't actually
> distinguish themselves from the Democrats outside of the electoral
> arena, whether the Republicans are in power or the Democrats.  (Ask
> yourselves why they're shrieking about this in between elections if
> their goal is anything other than to minimize open criticisms of the
> administration.)  And, yes, I know the answer . . . that in their
> heart of hearts they sincerely want a better world.  So do most
> people.  The question is whether you're willing to do something about
> it.
>
> In short, how do we understand people who make themselves invisible
> and then take potshots at those who do not as irrelevant?  As Kurt
> Vonnegut wrote of the career of Howard W. Campbell, Jr., "We are what
> we pretend to be, so we must be careful about what we pretend to be."
>
> In the real world, they are no more "progressive" than any other blind partisan.
>
> As I've argued, the world has gone past 1972 when you had rational,
> well-intentioned advocates of change supporting George McGovern and
> select liberals as a means to that end--and publicly press and
> demonstrate for progressive action in between the elections.
>
> Setting aside the historical debate over this and an analysis of
> whether or not it actually accomplished anything, that is now no
> longer the condition.  As far as that goes, even the rightward rush of
> the Democrats over the years isn't important.
>
> What is seems to be that the be-all and end-all of these people has
> become helping one corporate capitalist party win another, and nothing
> progressive has anything to do it with it any more.
>
> There are many ways to describe this, "progressive" not being one of them.
>
> ML
>
> ________________________________________________
> Send list submissions to: Marxism at greenhouse.economics.utah.edu
> Set your options at: http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/daynegoodwin%40gmail.com




More information about the Marxism mailing list