[lbo-talk] Bush expected to announce candidacy any day now

Wojtek Sokolowski sokol at jhu.edu
Wed Feb 18 06:50:31 PST 2004


Luke:
>
> To my knowledge, there are only three Dem-party apologists on this
list (I'm one
> of them). There might be two or three more social democrats.
Everyone else is
> further (in many cases, much further) to the left.

Could you explain what "being further to the left" actually mean in empirical terms?

I consider myself a social democrat and I can point at certain actually existing institutions and policies and identify parts of the world where those institutions and policies are practiced (e.g. Scandinavia) and say "This I believe is what we should have in this country." Anyone can look at that "this" and say "I know what you mean." One may or may not share the normative aspect of my position, but one should not have any problems with grasping the empirical meaning of it.

But I am really struggling to understand what that supposed majority on this list actually mean by saying or implying when they position themselves to the left of social democracy or by denouncing the Democratic party as "treacherous" (of whom or what?). Seriously, folks, what is it exactly that you want? I know what you do NOT want, but can anyone point at an institutional order or policies anywhere in the world and say "This is what I want in this country"? Or at least describe such an order and policies in less than 300 words and a matter-of-fact language?

Wojtek



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list