The proportion of voters who "see differences" between the Republican and Democratic Parties began to decline in 1964 and reached the lowest point in post-WW2 history -- visibly below 50% -- in 1972 and 1976, according to Jeffrey M. Stonecash (see Figure 3 of "The Income Gap," PS: Political Science & Politics, July 2006, p. 462, <http://www.apsanet.org/imgtest/PSJuly06Stonecash.pdf>). That decline roughly coincides with the Vietnam War (from the US perspective), from the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution (7 August 1964, 416-0 in the House, 88-2 in the Senate) to the victory of the Vietnamese Communist Party (30 April 1975), the only period in post-WW2 history when a critical mass, if hardly a majority, of Americans came to oppose US imperialism and the mode of production that gives rise to it.
On 8/8/07, Michael Smith <mjs at smithbowen.net> wrote:
> On 08/08/07 09:01:04 AM, Doug Henwood wrote:
> > Most radicals who take the not a dime's worth
> >
> > of difference line seem to think they're speaking for the masses, but
> >
> > evidently the masses don't agree. So how to reconcile?
>
> Is it conceivable that the masses are... mistaken? We seem to have no
> problem with this conclusion when we discuss the masses' religious
> views.
Neither the Iraq War in particular nor the "War on Terror" in general is like the Vietnam War in its impact on the masses. Besides, unlike at the height of the Vietnam War, when a variety of leftists attacked liberalism, most self-identified leftists are today liberals themselves. If liberalism is all there is to it (which isn't my view, but mine is decidedly a minority one even on the far left), the working-class masses are correct to practice religion, the only collectivist institution they have, and vote for the Democratic Party. -- Yoshie