>"Completely marginalized"? I don't think so. As Chomsky is fond to point
>out, it was the citizen resistance to Reagan's early attempts at direct
>intervention in Central America (remember the "White Paper" fiasco?) that
>drove that administration underground, and thus led to Iran/Contra. I was
>quite active at that time, and I remember plenty of meetings and
>mobilizations and direct actions -- not only in response to the wars in
>Salvador and Nicaragua, but also to apartheid in South Africa and
occupation
>in Palestine.
This is what's wrong with the "left thrives under the Right" argument. Yes, left groups get some extra juice in a pure wave the flag sense, but what was the result of the Central America mobilization? The defeat of the Sandinistas and the absolute impoverishment of the country under the heel of the IMF.
Haiti shows the opposite situation. Because of progressive pressure and a whole set of compromised relations with the Clinton administration, a socialist Aristide was restored to office. It's hardly a complete victory, but I will take the results in Haiti over Nicaragua any day of the week.
-- Nathan Newman