[lbo-talk] Armstrong as self-syndicator

[Wojtek Sokolowski]

Jon:
> But then the question arises, what really distinguishes Kerry voters
> from ABBers? ABBers said, "We'll vote for anyone but Bush." Kerry was
> nominated, thus becoming the "anyone but Bush." The sin beyond
> forgiving (sin against the Holy Ghost?) of the ABBers was that they
> supported Kerry rather than Nader (or maybe some other third-party
> candidate). So did all the Kerry voters. Wouldn't these radicals rather
> have had all the Kerry voters vote for Nader? And isn't their
> explanation for why the Kerry voters didn't vote for Nader, or some
> other third-party candidate, that these voters were duped by the
> corporate media, etc.? Kerry voters and ABBers are all wishy-washy
> liberals, aren't they?

The problem with many self-styled radicals is that they are seemingly unable
or unwilling to accept the basic fact that ANY election (not just those in
the US) is a multiple choice rather than essay exam.  If you want to be
counted, you need to pick from among the choices listed by the test
authority figure instead of scribbling your own alternative answers.  Every
C or above student understands the difference between the two.  

More seriously, if one wants a better, more progressive politics, the place
to start is to change the power balance on the ground, organize people and
set up institutions who can effectively counterbalance the power of
business, produce a class of public figures who will publicly espouse that
agenda, set up the propaganda machine that will effectively popularize that
agenda, and only then run candidates to political office on that agenda and
expect them to win.  Getting serious about DNC politics is a good place to
start.  

Thos who come to the game just before the election and ask people to "vote
their conscience" and similar rubbish are like that guy in an old Polack
joke who brings a duck to a cockfight.

Wojtek