>Doug wrote:- I wish one of you would respond to my argument that a
>Dem president provides a better discursive and organzing environment
>for more radical critiques of The System.
>
>
>The war, criminality and violence unleashed during previous
>Democratic administrations are equal in fury to Republican
>adminstrations, though they have been different (at times) in style,
>targets, beneficiaries.
I know that. Dems nuked Japan and created NATO, the CIA, and the IMF too.
>I will agree to a small part of Doug's point. Under Dems, more
>discourse and organizing are permitted on certain chosen avenues of
>thought and "safe criticism" (such as gender, morality, race, the
>allocation of government budgets, etc.); but only in arenas those
>that do not threaten the true workings of the system or its
>criminals.
No but these are not small things, which is why I say policies are modestly better. Modestly better lies between the same and massively transformed, and closer to the same. It's not like I'm claiming Dems will lead us to the antechamber to utopia. It's the very fact that they can't and don't that encourages more radical thinking and organizing when they're in power. Now people just blame Bush for everything that sucks.
>Does Doug believe that a presidency of the handpicked Kerry, the man
>who helped cover up CIA-Contra drugs and BCCI crimes, whose chief
>accomplishments were the coverups of official terrorism and
>narcoterrorism crimes, will result in some sort of progressive
>panacea for "discourse and organizing"?
Panacea? Can't you think in more subtle terms than that? I sure don't think that, and none of my fellow travellers do either. Far from it. Modestly better, that's all.
Doug