[lbo-talk] Re: a victory of sorts in india...

[Joseph Wanzala]

Nathan Newman wrote: "The Democratic Party has de facto been willing to cut 
such pacts with
independents willing to ally with them.  Look at Vermont where both Bernie
Sanders and Jeffords are not members of the Dems, but no one in the party
will support opponents to them.
The problem with Nader and the Greens is that they have zero strategy to
negotiate such electoral pacts.  Putting so much focus on a Presidential run
is just emblematic of their "rule or ruin" dead end approach."

The problem with this view is that ignores the fact that "Nader and the 
Greens' rejected this strategy because it is a cooptation strategy that 
requires making an accomodation with the neo-liberal imperatives of the 
Democratic Party. In other words the strategy requires working in tandem 
with and not opposing fundamental aspects of the Democratic Party agenda.

Joe W.


>From: "Nathan Newman" <nathanne at nathannewman.org>
>Reply-To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org
>To: <lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org>
>Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] Re: a victory of sorts in india...
>Date: Thu, 13 May 2004 14:31:07 -0400
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Shane Mage" <shmage at pipeline.com>
>
>
> >Isn't there someone here who can tell us how the BJP is really the
> >lesser of two evils?
> >
> >Doug
>
>-No, but yesterday there would have been plenty around
>-to tell us how voting Communist Party (of your choice)
>-would throw the election to the BJP.
>
>On what basis?  If the Communist Party is most likely to win a constituency
>against the BJP, as in West Bengal and other areas, voting Congress would 
>be
>seen as throwing the election to the BJP.
>
>How to vote strategically depends on the particular electoral system in
>place-- first-past-the-post, proportional representation, runoffs, etc.
>Reasonable left strategy under one electoral system is idiocy under 
>another.
>
>One reason, no doubt, that BJP lost is that the Left, Congress and a number
>of local parties were more coordinated in their election strategy.
>http://www.wsws.org/articles/2004/apr2004/indi-a23.shtml
>
>The Democratic Party has de facto been willing to cut such pacts with
>independents willing to ally with them.  Look at Vermont where both Bernie
>Sanders and Jeffords are not members of the Dems, but no one in the party
>will support opponents to them.
>
>The problem with Nader and the Greens is that they have zero strategy to
>negotiate such electoral pacts.  Putting so much focus on a Presidential 
>run
>is just emblematic of their "rule or ruin" dead end approach.
>
>Nathan Newman
>
>___________________________________
>http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk