>BUSH VERSUS KERRY:
>FOR THE RECORD
<snip>
>Defeating Bush, alas, means voting for Kerry in the swing states.
<snip>
>Many dear friends are committed to voting Nader/Camejo. On the West
>Coast and in New York this registers a vote to the left of Kerry and
>could add to the pressure but only if Kerry were elected.
I am pleased to hear that you are advocating voting for Nader/Camejo (or other candidates on the left) in one-party states, because that means *the majority of American voters* -- about 73% of them (only "27 percent of Americans live in TV markets where campaign ads are airing," i.e., in the battleground states, according to Marc Fisher "[No Ads, No Visits, No Contest," October 21, 2004, p. B1, <http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A50120-2004Oct20.html>]) -- should vote for Nader/Camejo (or other candidates on the left), against both Bush and Kerry. That ought to have been your main message in your radio interview with Doug Henwood of WBAI, but you missed the chance of spreading that important message via radio to voters in New York!
>The defeat of the incumbent has to be de-linked from the political
>character of the available alternative. Why? Because a defeat for
>Bush will mark a defeat for his policies.
A defeat for Bush, sir, would mark a defeat for his policies, only if the policies of "the available alternative" were opposed to Bush's. However, you acknowledge that "[h]is [Kerry's] policies, except on abortion and some other social issues, are virtually indistinguishable from those of Bush." Therefore, a defeat for Bush will mark a defeat for Bush's policies "on abortion and some other social issues" but a vindication of his policies on Iraq, Afghanistan, and Palestine in particular, his foreign policies in general, and most of his economic policies (excepting the areas where Kerry runs to the right of Bush).
I conclude that the best reason to vote for Kerry, based upon your analysis, is that the interests of the American men and women of the middle strata whose only concerns are "abortion and some other social issues" take precedence over those of the poorest Americans and foreigners who are directly assaulted, indirectly harmed, or malignly neglected by Kerry's policies.
>people will think Bush has been re-elected because a majority of the
>US electorate support his policies.
Whether Bush or Kerry gets elected, the winner will have the support of merely 25-30% -- a minority -- of the US electorate (see "Presidential Election Voter Turnout, 1924-2000," <http://www.fairvote.org/turnout/preturn.htm>).
`But what good came of it last? Quoth little Peterkin. `Why that I cannot tell', said he, `But it was a famous victory' -- Robert Southey, `The Battle of Blenheim'
>I have argued that the Inauguration should be an occasion for the
>largest national antiwar gathering possible demanding the withdrawal
>of all US troops from Iraq. There is no question of 'sowing
>illusions' in Kerry or the Democrats.
Those who have not toed the AnybodyButBush party line -- e.g., indefatigable ANSWER organizers <http://www.internationalanswer.org/> -- have and will be mobilizing for the inauguration protest (I saw many ANSWER volunteers handing out flyers for it at the August 29th anti-Bush/anti-Republican National Convention march in New York City). The problem is that the ABB party line has so demobilized and depoliticized activists that organizing for the inauguration protest has not had much traction so far. The last nationwide mobilization against the Iraq war happened on March 20, 2004. Since then, the majority of activists either have been working to elect Kerry, of necessity muting their criticism of his pro-war stance, or just gone home. The Million Worker March on October 17, 2004 <http://www.millionworkermarch.org/> -- under the leadership of Local 10 (a majority Black local) of the International Longshore and Warehouse Union -- attracted 5,000-10,0000; it was great to see the stirrings of the Black labor left, but most AnybodyButBush activists -- certainly all white AnybodyButBush activists -- shunned the march like a plague.
In short, once people are demobilized and depoliticized by the Democratic Party, it will take a lot of time to rebuild a social movement. You can't turn it on after election day just like that -- a social movement is not like an electrical appliance that has an on-and-off switch.
>So we will carry on fighting the incumbent if the incumbent carries
>on the war in Iraq. And if he does then surely at the end of four
>years he will go down as well and an intelligent third party could
>have an impact.
The AnybodyButBush ideology divided the Green Party in three ways (Nader/Camejo supporters, Cobb/LaMarce supporters, and Kerry/Edwards supporters) in 2004. The Democratic Party lawyers have successfully negated voting rights of Nader/Camejo supporters by removing Nader/Camejo from ballots in a number of states. Nader/Camejo is on the ballots in 34 states and the District of Columbia, and Cobb/LaMarche, on 27 states and the District of Columbia (see <http://ballot-access.org/>) -- that's a big setback for the Green Party from 2000, when it had its candidates Nader/LaDuke on the ballots in 43 states and the District of Columbia. I hope that the Green Party will recover from the setback, but recovery is far from certain. It may fail to recover by 2008, let alone making a great leap forward and winning the support of tens of millions (as of now, the total registered Greens in the USA are 300,476 -- see <http://web.greens.org/statestatus/>).
At the end of Kerry's first term, then, will you be compelled to advocate voting for the Republican presidential candidate in 2008, on the grounds that "you have to punish him [the incumbent], and the best way to punish him is to remove him from office" and "[t]here's no third party"?
Your humble admirer from Japan, currently residing in the battleground state of Ohio, -- Yoshie
* Critical Montages: <http://montages.blogspot.com/> * Greens for Nader: <http://greensfornader.net/> * Bring Them Home Now! <http://www.bringthemhomenow.org/> * OSU-GESO: <http://www.osu-geso.org/> * Calendars of Events in Columbus: <http://sif.org.ohio-state.edu/calendar.html>, <http://www.freepress.org/calendar.php>, & <http://www.cpanews.org/> * Student International Forum: <http://sif.org.ohio-state.edu/> * Committee for Justice in Palestine: <http://www.osudivest.org/> * Al-Awda-Ohio: <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Al-Awda-Ohio> * Solidarity: <http://www.solidarity-us.org/>