[Marxism] Flectcher blather
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
[have to register]
The Sequestering of Barack Obama
by Robert Kuttner
The American Prospect 2/26/12
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
> 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.
> 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