Pleasures

Nathan Newman nathan at newman.org
Sat Nov 11 09:30:14 PST 2000


----- Original Message ----- From: "Chuck Grimes" <cgrimes at tsoft.com>
>
> Chuck0 wrote:
>
> >If Gore is so in favor of
> >supporting the "rule of law," why doesn't he throw in the towel and
> >concede defeat?

-This situation could not possibly be improved, only prolonged like an -endless cum. I hope that Gore will go down in a kicking and screaming, -uncontrollable tantrum of litigation, smear, and shit slinging. I am -certain that Bush would, if their respective positions were -reversed--which of course could easily happen by next week. -In terms of a marxist agenda, say a critique of capital, this election -stalemate is meaningless. But within the context of political and -social history peculiar to the US, this is something like the preamble -to a civil war: an election stalemate, turned into protracted -litigation as retribution for an impeachment.

This is to repeat the gist of the articles I've just posted, but I just am appalled that the two Chucks are both denigrating the right to use the courts to fight voting rights violations, with Chuck Grimes comparing such legal battles to tantrums and ejaculation.

The frigging ballot violated state law in Palm Beach, voters were denied translators, police setup road checks near polling booths, latinos were harassed to provide extra identification not required by law, and registered black voters were told they were not registered.

IT IS NOT A TANTRUM to demand that these illegal voting rights violations be corrected. The right to go to court to fight such inequities is what the March at Selma and the passage of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 was all about. People died for the right to use courts to override the illegal acts of local election officials.

It is a completely Marxist battle to uphold the right to vote and the right to legal redress when those rights are violated.

Of course Gore wants the votes counted, but they are not his votes. They are the votes of the people denied access to the ballot. Buying in to the media denigration and ridicule of those seeking litigation to defend their rights is a rightwing and appalling attitude.

If people cannot litigate close elections because of calls for concessions and "dignity of the process", they will never have a chance to seek legal redress of the pervasive violations of rights that continue to this day in voting booth across the country.

-- Nathan Newman



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list