"But basically I do not see this impeachment as just a melodrama cooked up by cretins. This is a major constitutional clash in the the world's biggest state while it was going to war. Ultimately a clash this serious must be fuelled by money, however much it is a clash between two idological blocs, otherwise they would have compromised. It has major implications for the legitimacy of bourgeois politics."
of course it's not *just* a melodrama cooked up by cretins though it is certainly that too. perhaps, cretins with money and influence--say old-money bourgeois cretins. and there's nothing to say that this is simply a clash between two ideological blocks fuelled by money. things are far more complicated, even within the republican party. some 2/3rds of the swing voters that clinton lost would probably have voted against impeachment, were it not that they feared alienating the fundamentalist spawn without which they can't win anything--that's their belief anyway. this is a horrible miscalculation on their part, in my mind, since the radical right is going to be far more isolated in coming elections after this whole mess--that would be my bet anyway. (perhaps a little too hopeful, but . . .)
as for implications for bourgeois politics, i don't know about that. maybe for american politics, for sure. the consequences for our political culture can't be measured yet, but in the short run it's bound both to delegitimate the bourgeoisie as a governing class, probably displace the republicans as the majority party, and (maybe, just maybe) make way for some more serious local third party politics. maybe.
christian