The Language of Betrayal

[Brad DeLong]

>On Sun, 19 Nov 2000, Leo Casey wrote:
>
>>  On the one hand, any one who argued for a strategic
>>  approach to the election, and campaigned for Gore in
>>  order to avoid serious setbacks for labor, people of
>>  color, women, gays and lesbians and environmentalists,
>>  clearly has no principles and lacks all self-respect,
>
>Leo, you're putting me to sleep. You've not cited one single empirical
>fact showing that Gore has been good for any of the groups above. The
>Clinton-Gore regime has jailed 1 million Americans, criminalized 3% of the
>adult population and probably 20% of all African Americans, given hundreds
>of billions in tax breaks to the rich, allowed the Wall Street Bubble to
>spiral completely out of control, maintained a Cold War-sized military,
>done nothing to improve the medieval labor laws of this country, but
>lobbied long and hard for NAFTA, the WTO and related horrors...

Yes. But look on the bright side! 4% unemployment. A bunch of 
after-tax money transferred to the working poor via the EITC. The 
first sustained growth in low-end real wages in a generation. And at 
least a halting of the rise in income inequality if not a reversal in 
relative inequality trends.

I've never understood why people who care passionately about one end 
of the political spectrum relative to the other are so vulnerable to 
the "we want a choice, not an echo" line. If you think that the U.S. 
government is far to the right of where it should be, that means that 
you care a lot about a pro- vs. an anti-labor NLRB, that you care a 
lot about marginal increases in the minimum wage, that you care a lot 
about RU-486, that you care a lot about higher taxes on the rich.

Only those smack in the middle of the political spectrum have an 
excuse for apathy with respect to the choice between Democrats and 
Republicans...

Brad DeLong