>
> Justin Schwartz wrote: >Jim [heartfield]'s post on the history of race in
the
> US and the role of the Democrats strikes me as absolutely brilliant--I hope
> he writes it up as an article (and posts it). ...<
Louis Proyect responds: >It was already an article in LM magazine, as part of an ideological offensive against affirmative action. LM, and James Heartfield personally, argues that the American ruling-class favors affirmative action. ...<
whatever the reactionary content of the whole argument that hearfield and LM present, the fact is that in California, the big corporations _opposed_ the anti-AA state-wide iniative (the number of which I've forgotten). They like having simple formulas for dealing with complex issues.
Now don't get me wrong. I favor AA -- and argue for it all the time. It shouldn't be abolished. But it's a "second best" reform. Or rather it represents a _compromise_ between business and those striving for racial equality, kind of like social democracy. The turn against AA represents part of the bigger rejection of New Deal-type and/or social-democratic reforms. In California, the anti-AA drive had a large popular base, amongst white middle class (and sometimes working class) folks, and among some other ethnic groups.
Jim Devine jdevine at popmail.lmu.edu & http://clawww.lmu.edu/Departments/ECON/jdevine.html Economic theories "have become little more than vain attempts to revive exploded superstitions, or sophisms like those of Mr. Malthus, calculated to lull the oppressors of mankind into a security fo everlasting triumph." -- adapted from Percy Bysshe Shelley.