[lbo-talk] The very worst custodians of empire

Yoshie Furuhashi critical.montages at gmail.com
Tue Jun 27 16:27:28 PDT 2006


On 6/27/06, Marvin Gandall <marvgandall at videotron.ca> wrote:
> Doug wrote in reply to Yoshie:
>
> > So we're powerless on Iraq, but you think you can turn it around with
> > Iran and Palestine? That doesn't make any sense. Why not emphasize
> > something with some actual promise, like living wage legislation or
> > national health insurance?
> ======================
> That's a good point, and it's interesting to speculate on why this doesn't
> happen.

Instead of speculating, why not listen to what I actually said? "I said clearly that we ought to focus on Iran and Palestine, Latin America, and Russia and China (in that order) in _foreign policy_ (cf. <http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/pipermail/lbo-talk/Week-of-Mon-20060515/038266.html>).

In domestic policy, focus on universal health care" (at <http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/pipermail/lbo-talk/Week-of-Mon-20060626/040926.html>).

If single-payer health care had been the litmus test in 2004 for American liberals and leftists, they would have voted for Nader rather than Kerry, but that was not the case. Will it be in the future?

There's H.R.676, sponsored by Conyers and co-sponsored by 72: <http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:h.r.00676:>. Would American liberals and leftists be able to commit to a program that supports only Democrats willing to co-sponsor that and replace Democrats and Republicans who refuse to do so by Democrats, Greens, and other independents who pledge to support it?

-- Yoshie <http://montages.blogspot.com/> <http://mrzine.org> <http://monthlyreview.org/>



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list