Chris Burford wrote:
>: What do radical leftists in the USA say about Bush's advantage in the
>: election polls? Many are critical of the "Third Way" but is it not
>needed >:now?
And BD replied:
>Actually, I'd say the current situation is the fault of "Third Way" democrats.
>
>It's nothing new that Republicans in the US attack the value of government
>and deride the ability of
>government to improve people's lives. What is new in the last decade is
>tht the Democrats - led by
>Clinton and Gore - have largely agreed with the Republican diagnosis of
>how bad "big government" is,
>and joined the Republicans in deriding the ability of government to have a
>positive impact on
>people's lives, (A good example is how Clinton - seeking a short-term
>political advantage in
>negotiating the budget in congress - popularized the notion that Social
>Security, arguably once the
>most effective and popular US government program of all, is actually a
>soon-to-be bankrupt failure).
I agree. Now, I can see why, in places like Australia (where everyone is obliged to vote), a third-wayer (ie an opportunistic careerist seeking to cash in on the brand name, which is all that remains, of an erstwhile social democrat party) might come along. Moving people to the voting booths is not part of your brief in such countries - they have to go, and all you have to do is offer them the less unpalatable of two options.
But in America, people don't have to vote, and I'd've thought a predictably close election would have proffered just the sort of opportunity a real social democrat would take to be real social democrat he is. Social security, public health, the minimum wage, occupational health and safety and a loud let-women-decide stance on abortion are all discursively salvageable causes, and, more than that, they're the sort of thing that get bums into booths (I'd crawl over broken glass to get to the booth if someone dared offer me that - oh, how complacent we were in those recent-but-far-away days of seemingly invulnerable civilisation, eh?).
On that account, Gore is, like Clinton, a real third wayer (ie opportunistic careerist knowingly mouthing the ideas of the unknowingly idealess), and that's that.
I know the Supreme Court is probably on the line, but there comes (inevitably, I think) a time when an entrenched pair of parties so approximates an identity that you just have to say 'it's time to play my small part in building a political culture capable of thinking outside the ever-narrowing corridor.' And Nader is all that's on offer right now.
At the very least, the prospect of a bunch of Democrats, licking their wounds after a five per cent loss, and staring wistfully at Nader's six per cent vote, is not without its virtues.
Cheers, Rob.