it's heating up

Lisa & Ian Murray seamus at
Wed Oct 25 18:38:46 PDT 2000

>> All elections are

individual candidate vehicles borrowing organization usually from

unions and

a few other scattered non-electoral groups.

As for money, again who cares about the DLC corporate money? Unions and

other progressives can supply all that is needed to run a good protest

campaign and even support a range of real candidates who win Dem primaries

all the time. See the defeat of Rep. Martinez in the Dem primary earlier

this year in California. ************

Or unions running that great protest candidate Al Snore?

>>As for Jackson, it wasn't the DLC types who dismantled the Rainbow

Coalition. It was Jackson himself. I did telephone fundraising for the

Rainbow in 1989 from the DC office where we had to listen to all

the chapter

members screaming irately about Jackson's operatives dismantling the

chapters that might challenge his top-down control of the

organization. It

has nothing to do with some "Democratic Party" crushing leftists.

************ Right, in that particular case it had to do with leftists immolating one another on the rocks of Ego. Can you play "King of the Hill"?

>>The point is that there is no grassroots, democratically controlled

organization of progressives consistently running candidates in Dem

primaries. ************ Again, can you say "King of the Hill"? The larger issue is why we're every bit as competitive as capitalists when it comes to positional goods when forming organizational hierarchies, whether intentionally or despite ourselves. This is where anarchists just laugh at us [and rightfully so]

It doesn't exist (although the unions are beginning to build a
> real network themselves), so it is hardly surprising that
> DLC-types with the
> money win out. You can't beat big money with nothing.

Oh no, not "the if you can't beat 'em, suck up to 'em while being uncompromising on your issue positions and maybe they'll respect you and toss you some $$$ along with the shrimp and champagne" argument again.

>>And the Greens are

not a substitute, since it will continually be constrained by the spoiler

problem. People can worry about the arguments I make, but the bigger

problem is the reality that most progressive Dem voters won't jump either.

-- Nathan Newman *******

Nah, I can live with your arguments, but why write off the greens so quickly? See my earlier comments.....Gore is a spoiler for Bush and vice versa; everyone's a spoiler from some perspective.....


More information about the lbo-talk mailing list