As for depoliticization (= silence) and elections. I wouldn't say that elections per se are necessarily depoliticizing. Just _American_ regime "elections": The Democrats and Republicans are _not_ mass political parties. Rather, they are state-parties comprised of various factions of the bourgeoisie and their favored hirelings. Evidence: unlike in other comparable countries, they do not maintain permanent political facilities (offices, headquarters, etc.) _independently_ of the offices of state that they jointly and permanently (so far, thanks to the Nathan Newman Brigade) monopolize. These monopolized offices _are_ their party headquarters from which they operate.
The "elections" then, are really nothing more than plebescites on the popularity of the (one and the same) regime. They are "regime stability tests", nothing more.
This is quite different, btw, from the case in the 19th and even early 20th century.
The fact that civil rights, trade union and Christian fundie organizations regularly work for these state parties of the ruling class does not give these parties a mass base. These former are _self organized_ with an existence independent of the state parties. Their separate existence is recognized as such in electoral law. Independent, therefore, except in their minds - ideologically - which of course is what the present struggle is all about: to get people to realize in their minds what already exists in reality - the material basis for political independence.
But to give even temporary support to the parties of an alien and even opposed class is to condemn oneself to varying degrees of silence (= effective depoliticization), or to exclusion from the electoral process altogether. Because the two parties are organized strictly along the same bourgeois class lines as described above, the silence varies by the degree to which the supporting mass organizations are also structured along (opposing) class lines, and not surprisingly then, the trade unions are the most silent of them all around "election" time. Other organizations not so organized have more room to voice a few pre-election criticisms. Yoshie already gave evidence of this in regards to the "traditional" African-American civil rights organizations, which of course is why they are being cut out of the game by the Democratic Party branch of the bourgeoisie - they just aren't "quiet" enough. It is clear that the Dems do not want a repeat of the Florida 2000 noise.
This makes an interesting contrast with the criticisms recently voiced by the fundies over "abandoning Jerusalem". Here these not only have the political space to make their criticisms public without much fear of reprisal, but even to threaten to withdraw support to their favored ruling class party, the Republicans. This, together with the fact that in the case of the African-American civil rights organizations, the Democratic Party branch of the bourgeoisie is the active agent, is evidence of a distinct ideological bias on the part of our ruling class as a whole. And it is slanted quite far to the right.
So, shaddup until after the ceremonial plebiscite is concluded.
-Brad Mayer
Yoshie:
> As Carrol says, elections not
> only demobilize social movements but also depoliticize participants
> in them.
Do you have any empirical evidence of that, or words of the guru are worth more than mere facts?
Wojtek