John Gulick wrote:
> DP wrote:
>
> >"Absolute Failure"? Loath though I am to defend the Dems -- who I wish would
> >go the Jonestown route -- I must say that there were post-New Deal areas
> >where the left *did* influence the party, [snip]
> >DP
>
> I sez:
>
> Yes, it's important to recognize the degree to which the political left
> and the not-so-consciously-political masses in the late 60's through early
> 70's on a whole host of fronts
Yes -- but note that that impact achieved its effect as much through its impact on conservatives (Dirksen, Nixon) as on the Democratic Party. Dirksen gave us the Civil Rights legislation -- responding to pressures which the Kennedys had done their damnest to dissipate -- and Nixon gave us most of the legislation which is still helpful.
The women's movmement foundered (measure being the ERA) when it forsook the streets for regular politicking with Democrats.
I would still stick to "absolute failure" as applied to affecting the Democratic Party -- considerable success in affecting the whole establishment, "left" and right, by mass action. If we had the mass movement that was behind Civil Rights in the '60s we could get as much from Bush as we ever got from Kennedy or Johnson (or would have gotten from McGovern).
Various minor complexities aside, the future of the left depends above all on delegitimating the Democratic Party.
Carrol