[lbo-talk] Nader, et al

Michael Smith mjs at smithbowen.net
Tue Aug 7 08:44:19 PDT 2007


On 08/07/07 11:12:28 AM, Doug Henwood wrote:
>
> On Aug 7, 2007, at 10:33 AM, Michael Smith wrote:
>
> > The last sentence here, I think, reveals the fallacy in this
> argument.
> > It's the aisle-crossers who control the party as_an_institution_.
>
> Huh? The minority, not the leadership, control an institution? That
> makes no sense.

What makes no sense, I think, is the notion that a "minority" (the aisle-crossers) could repeatedly defy the actual will of the institution and get away with it. The fact that they never get sanctioned for breaking from what the party supposedly advocates suggests to me that, far from contravening the actual will of the party, the aisle-crossers in fact *represent* the actual will of the party -- considered, once again, as an institution rather then merely a collection of individuals.

Just contemplate how well this works for the likes of Pelosi and Kerry -- they can keep their liberal credentials burnished, to please the folks back home, with fair words and beautiful speeches, but thanks to the aisle-crossers, their opposition can remain purely verbal and cost-free.



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list