[lbo-talk] Beyond the Bipartisan Hegemony [Fwd: Re: fighting ideology]

Grant Lee grantlee at iinet.net.au
Mon Jul 14 16:51:29 PDT 2003



> In the U.S., the left got hammered
> during the Reagan years. The Clinton years saw the rise of the
> anti-sweatshop movement (which was stimulated by the admin's absurd
> corporate whitewash front), the "Seattle" coalition, etc. Going
> further back, the Eisenhower 50s were a disaster, but the JFK-LBJ 60s
> were the opposite.
>
> Doug

The line of reasoning I referred to is not about economic cycles, which are taken to be independent of party politics. The reasoning goes that if -- for example -- the Nixon-Ford or Reagan-Bush years had stretched on and on, due to the failure of Democrats to come up with a credible successor, then the backlash would have built and built, and the electorate would have turned further and further left. Which, of course, is a big if, and I don't actually buy the theory.

Apart from anything else, I'm personally somewhat dependent on state paternalism and so I tend to vote centre-left because I rarely have the opportunity to vote for any real left candidates.

In the remote past I have stood outside in the rain or the baking sun, handing out "how to vote" fliers for centre-left candidates. These days it would take the imminent election of an insane fascist to get me out there for them.



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list