[lbo-talk] 2004 election, again

Wojtek Sokolowski swsokolowski at yahoo.com
Thu Jun 1 17:23:14 PDT 2006


--- Doug Henwood <dhenwood at panix.com> wrote:


> They're not "wimps" in the sense of lacking, um,
> testicularity. But
> they're structurally incapable of responding,
> because to push this
> hard would provoke a serious constitutional crisis,
> and they don't
> dare do that. As Al Gore said the other day
> <http://newyorkmetro.com/
> news/politics/17065/index2.html>:

I believe EE Schattschneider (_Semi sovereign people_) argued along the same lines in the 1960s. IIRC, his argument is that either party finds it less risky, in a long run, to accept a temporary electoral defeat and hope to rebound a few years later, which is almost certain to happen, than upsetting this system of cyclical power changes by bringing in unpredicatble elements (multiple parties) or overhauling the electoral system altogether.

Wojtek

__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list