> Isn't it obvious? He knows, better than many Leftists, that
> the USA is an out-and-out plutocracy, not any sort of
> democracy. So he's making a direct and pointed appeal
> to the real electorate--guaranteeing that Imperial policy,
> now being impeded by the general stupidity, ignorance, and
> obscurantism of Ubu and his Bushits, will be pursued
> intelligently and competently by tested servants of Empire.
But can it be pursued intelligently and competently? If Kerry and his allegedly smart-as-a-whip advisors had started a war with Iraq, would it have ended up any differently than it has? Is there an intelligent way to administer an empire, or only an intelligent way to wind it up?
I think Kerry, right at this moment, is aiming for the undecided middle vote, so he can beat Bush, and will worry about what he will do with the empire later. Like Nixon's "I have a secret plan to end the Vietnam War."
The ruling class always has its splits and factions -- Kerry represents one faction, Bush another. Same old story.
Jon Johanning // jjohanning at igc.org __________________________________ A sympathetic Scot summed it all up very neatly in the remark, 'You should make a point of trying every experience once, excepting incest and folk-dancing.' -- Sir Arnold Bax