On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 20:02:28 -0400 Doug Henwood <dhenwood at panix.com>
writes:
> Jim Farmelant wrote:
>
> >Unfortunately, I don't think that the people you know necessarily
> >constitute
> >a representative sample of the people who are currently
> >stumping for Kerry. We need only look back to the Clinton
> >Administration to see what is likely to happen if Kerry is
> >elected. Clinton, as you may remember, helped to accomplish
> >such feats as the passage of NAFTA, GATT, the abolition of
> >AFDC, and the passage of the Antiterrorism Act in 1996 which
> >constituted a serious threat to civil liberties and helped to set
> >the stage for the Patriot Act under Bush. For the most
> >part, barely a peep was heard from liberals and progressives
> >when Clinton was doing these things, even though if they
> >had been done instead under a Republican president,
> >they would have screamed bloody murder.
>
> And to what effect? What Bush initiatives have those screaming
> liberals been able to block? A second Bush admin would almost
> certainly propose deep cuts in civilian spending and the
> privatization of Social Security - and with a Republican Congress,
> they'd probably get them. Al Franken would be powerless to stop
> them.
>
> I really don't know how many times I've got to say this. I don't
> expect much that's good from Kerry. I expect less pressure to cut
> civilian spending and no SS privatization. Aside that, it's
> capitalism as usual. I look forward to marginally better policies,
Actually, I would think a Democratic president would be better able to get SS privatization than a Republican, just as it took a Democratic president to abolish AFDC (something that had been on the Republicans' wish list since Reagan's time) and to pass NAFTA. You might recall, that the Clinton Administration had been giving some serious consideration to "reforming" SS through partial privatization. It was basically Monicagate that aborted this. If Bush were re-elected and attempted to push through legislation for privatizing SS, it would likely face a Democratic filibuster in the Senate. If Kerry were elected and he attempted to push through similar legislation, he probably would be able to head off a Democratic filibuster, and it would most likely pass with the congressional Republicans voting for it, and most of the congressional Democrats against.
Another thing to consider is the possible revival of the draft. Given the manpower problems that the military is suffering in Iraq and Afghanistan, I think we are quite likely to see a serious attempt at reviving the draft in the next administration, regardless of who is elected. However, which person do you think would have the political credibility to accomplish this, Dubya, with his uncertain service in the Texas Air National Guard, or John Kerry, the Vietnam war hero?
And Kerry has made it clear that he wants to stay in Iraq. And given the fact that he has said that he is going to give high priority to mending fences with the Europeans and that he is going to try to get more NATO troops into Iraq, he would seem to have a better chance at succeeding at keeping the US in Iraq than the hapless George Bush. For those of us who want the US out of Iraq as soon as possible, the choice here is by no means clearcut. And just to remind you, Bill Clinton almost invaded Iraq in 1998. That effort got derailed when he sent Secretary of State Albright and other Administration officials to speak at Ohio State where they got met by hostile demonstrators (as I recall Yoshie and I think, Justin, had something to do with that). Then, Monicagate intruded and kept the Clinton Administration sufficiently distracted from proceeding further. It's also good to recall, that in the meantime, Clinton had kept up the sanctions against Iraq, and subjected that country to frequent airstrikes.
>
> a better discursive and organizing environment for radicals, and a
> productive disillusionment.
I think you're counting on Kerry producing suffucient disillusionment among progressives to promote radicalization. On the other hand it is quite possible that liberals and progressives will stick with Kerry, regardless of what he does, especially if he come under assault from the rightwing attack machine, just as they did with Clinton. In which case, Kerry will have a free pass to move further to the right.
>
> And, Jim, what's your alternative? Anyone who wins the American
> presidency is, unless things change radically, going to be a loyal
> servant of the bourgeoisie. You got a candidate in mind who wouldn't
>
> fit that bill? Or does it just not matter to you?
>
> Doug
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>
________________________________________________________________ The best thing to hit the Internet in years - Juno SpeedBand! Surf the Web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER! Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!