<!doctype html public "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN"> <html><head><style type="text/css"></style><title>Bush expected to announce candidacy any day now</title></head><body> <div><font face="Charcoal" color="#000000">>>Considering that just about every progressive mass organizer in<br> >>this country wants to see Bush defeated, perhaps that should tell<br> >>us something?<br> ><br> >Correct.<br> ><br> >And any progressive organizer with any sense recognizes that the<br> >long term goal of building a long term challenge to corporate<br> >hegemony cannot go into hibernation every time the worst excesses of<br> >capital reveal themselves, as they have, like clockwork over the</font></div> <div><font face="Charcoal" color="#000000">>past two decades.</font></div> <div><font face="Charcoal" color="#000000">><br> >You have said a lot about the first and nothing about the second.<br> ></font></div> <div><font face="Charcoal" color="#000000">>Do you care?</font></div> <div><br></div> <div>Based on subsequent postings it appears that, in a word, the answer is "No."   It appears that Luke can chalk up a fourth member of the LBO corporate Democrat defense league.</div> <div><br></div> <div>As for the question what have I done to increase participation in politics, under normal circumstances I wouldn't dignify this accusation with an answer.  In this case I will since it alludes to a subject touched on in my Progressive Review piece which I have never seen discussed and that is that big city machines operate not by increasing political participation but by limiting it.  The explanation is obvious which is that as rates of participation decline, the voting blocks which machines control through patronage become proportionately more significant. </div> <div><br></div> <div>It is entirely predictable that the Dems have never undertaken serious voter registration drives here and never will with the result that registration rates are pitiful and rates of turnout are even worse.  A further consequence is that the New Haven and other big city delegations have much less power on the state level compared to the suburbs where registration and turn out is much greater.  The machine is willing to accept this trade off-a sure lock on local power at the expense of disenfranchisement (and ultimately immiseration) of the constituency they claim to represent on the state level.  While I haven't studied the matter-some should-, this same dynamic is likely to be operative in most big cities.  The bottom line is that the Democrats have only themselves to blame for their increasing inability to turn out what they claim (increasingly laughably) to be their base.</div> <div><br></div> <div>This analysis is entirely consistent with Carrol's excellent observation with respect to the deeply principled nature of the Democratic Party.</div> <div><br></div> <div>We, of course, are seriously committed to voter registration and participation because we have to be.  The result is that in the wards we ran in, rates of participation doubled and in some cases tripled.</div> <div><br></div> <div>There are now thousands, yes thousands, of new newly registered and/or active voters as a consequence of our actions.</div> <div><br></div> <div>Most of these, incidentally, will probably vote for the likely Democratic presidential nominee.  Not that it makes any difference in CT where Democrats routinely win by huge margins.</div> <div><br></div> <div>Lot of thanks we get.</div> <div><br></div> <div>John</div> <x-sigsep><pre>-- </pre></x-sigsep> </body> </html>