"My only question is, do I turn over my sword to Gore-supporter nathan, or socialist nathan? Or will you come with two heads?"
and John Halle said:
"Incidentally do you object to being placed closer to Donna Shalala than Noam Chomsky. "
What drives me nuts about the whole third party debate is that people can't seem to tell the difference between a tactical argument versus strategic vision and philosophical/political commitments. Max wants to argue that one can vote for Gore or one can be a socialist, one or the other, as if there have never been socialists, Maoists, and communists in the US who have ever voted Democratic in our elections. It is reasonable to argue that such tactics were mistaken in the past and in the present, but it is really "lefter than thou" sectarianism to so routinely question other peoples motives and political commitments as is so common on this list.
On what kind of economic system I would like for this world, of course I am closer to Chomsky than to Shalala. Maybe Shalala is a secret leftwing socialist, but whatever my Democratic voting habits, I make no bones about what my political vision and commitments are all about.
I happen to think that EMPIRICALLY, voting third party is useless and counterproductive in most cases under a winner-take-all voting system. Others disagree with that EMPIRICAL assessment of the use of electoral campaigns in building support for socialism, but that is an empirical disagreement over the effectiveness of a particular tactic. It ultimately says nothing, repeat NOTHING, about each sides commitment to long-term political visions. Defining ones politics by ones tactics is political fetishism of the worst sort.
I have a relatively lengthy arrest record from direct action and picket line arrests, but there are also many cases where I have argued strenuously against direct action in a particular politcal situation, depending on the empirical gains or losses likely to be suffered. The most militant action in a particular situation is not always the most leftwing action, since if it leads to defeat, then it is ultimately a frustration of any socialist goals.
The key is to pitch ones actions for maximum effective power and minimum destructive backlash or repression, an empirical assessment that will always be hotly debated but should be attempted among activists with respect and openminded engagement.
Tactics are tools, nothing more. Without strategy and craft, the sharpest tool in the world will just create sawdust and splinters.
-- Nathan Newman