[lbo-talk] What the results tell us...

[Sean Andrews]

On 11/7/06, B. <docile_body at yahoo.com> wrote:
> The GOP won 100% of statewide offices in Texas. Kinky,
> the living cartoon character, is not governor, thank
> God. He got less than 10%. Governor Goodhair (i.e.
> Perry) still reigns in the big red state.

yeah, it's pretty sad.  So many people seemed to taste the blood in
the water there that they split the vote in his favor.

But I have
> little belief our voting system will change anything
> substantial, even less so now than before. It can
> affect a few things, but, fuck it -- look how many
> Dems had to lean way, way rightward to make as little
> advances as they did nationally. Depressing.

definitely.  The pundits are looking too much at the horse race.
Strikingly, the most unrealistic assessment of this election I heard
was Katrina VH on Charlie Rose who seemed to think this was evidence
of some sort of sea change in US politics as opposed to a referendum
for the least possible change in the status quo.  The vote here in VA
is probably the best example of that.  Though--to tap into another
conversation in this thread--Webb, right wing clone as he is, made
pulling out of Iraq a cornerstone of his campaign.  If it turns out
he's won this (which will evidently be weeks unless Allen and the GOP
decide to concede) that should say something.

On the other hand, I don't trust anyone who says we're pulling any
troops.  It seems like we've invested way too much in the way of bases
in that country to make simply leaving even a remote possibility.  In
this, I think Dean is basically speaking to the truth on the ground
which is that the US military is well on its way to expanding their
"empire of bases" well into Iraq.  On the legal/economic front, Naomi
Klien been closely following how the neo-liberal ideology is a part of
the founding documents of the Iraqi government, so for the most part,
any pull out will be a matter of appearances.  We might become less
overtly imperial, but only because it is assumed all the basic
imperial mechanisms are in place: we have a force to defend the "rule
of law" and a law drafted along the lines favorable to US capital (at
least in ideological outlines if not in its material results, which,
in any case, are supposed to eventually follow from those outlines).
I doubt that the Iraqis who've been paying attention will find this
any more acceptable, even if average US citizens can begin to comfort
themselves that they are less responsible for the mess they've
created.  American hegemony in the world, it would seem, hinges on
which of these perspectives can be made most convincing.

Thus, it would seem, the investigations being predicted by democrats
are much more likely than any movement on actual domestic or foreign
policy. I don't think there's much of an opening at all for the left
in this--as was evident in the exchanges b/w Katrina VH and the
mainstream press guys (Newsweek and NYT) and GOP
strategists/columnists (e.g. David Brooks): the closest thing we're
gonna get to the left ended up beating Lamont despite losing the
primary.  Whether this will excite the supposed base or just
disenchant everyone else who thinks they are getting "the left"
remains to be seen.  In any case, this state (VA) just passed a "gay
marriage amendment" 58 to 42 so I don't think much has changed at all.