>Doug explained himself clearly then, and yet you've repeatedly
>misrepresented him as uncritical of the democrats. You are doing it
>even now, in this post, accusing him of being different from Max.
>You suggest that Max wants to criticize Dems and Doug doesn't. What
>horse shit. Why insist on dividing people like this? It's some weird
>debate tactic where you try to marshall others by flattering them,
>so they'll shut up and not take sides with Doug against you? What?
Thank you. I don't know how many times I've criticized Dems, here and elsewhere, in the last couple of months. Even if I took off my shoes I'd run out of digits to count them on. I've said many times that should he win the election, Kerry would become the enemy on Nov 3. How much more explicit do I need to get? I've said a million times that Kerry represents imperialism as usual, which would be an improvement over the manic variant we've got now, but would still be imperialism. I doubt the Kerry campaign would welcome my support, or be moved to republish the quasi-endorsement editorial I'm finishing up right now.
>Further, since YOU are so sure that building a left movement must be
>on the basis of party-building (which, to my knowledge, Doug doesn't
>seem to advocate),
I'm all for building parties. I've been reading a bit about the history of the Swedish social democrats, and it's a reminder of how complicated that task is. In a small, homogenous country with a large predisposed constituency, it took them decades - decades that included working with established parties, developing roots in unions and cooperatives, creating schools and recreational societies, etc. Imagine how much more difficult it might be in a large, heterogenous country. New parties can't be built by people who retire from politics because they didn't get friendly enough coverage in The Nation.
And like I said before, it's not for me. I don't have the time or the temperament, and it would undermine my credibility as a journalist to be a party functionary. But there are many people in the world. That's what a division of labor is good for. My strength is in political/economic analysis and it semi-popularization. Other people are good at organizing and polemicizing.
Doug