> Doug wrote:
>
>> What left are you talking about?
>
> The actually existing left.
>
> I like Marta Harnecker's definition, which I unfortunately can't quote
> now because the pdf files of her _Rebuilding the Left_ have been
> removed from the rebelion.org web site. By the way, Marta's
> definition is closely related to the issues I'm currently discussing
> with Miles.
>
> Marta tries to include in her definition all sources of conscious
> opposition to capitalism from the grassroots or from above, not only
> the politically organized left, but also that other part -- much more
> diffused -- occupied in building "autonomous social spaces" and ways
> of life alternative to the ways of capital.
Hmm, well leaving aside complicated questions - like does that include the proprietors of alternative cafes in places like Ithaca? - that's probably no more than 5% of the U.S. pop. Which isn't a trivial number. But without any organization, it's just a target demographic.
> I haven't done any serious research. This is just out of my most
> informal observation. But, IMO, compared to the 1990s, the left today
> has a much broader public appeal and is ready to demand much more than
> the left in the 1990s.
I hope you're right. We'll see, won't we?
> That's why I don't think Barack Obama is Bill Clinton redux.
BHO seems to think so, at least to some degree. From that ABC welfare reform piece I posted earlier:
> During a 1996 interview with the Cleveland Plain Dealer, Obama
> could not conceal his disappointment in his fellow Democrat. "Bill
> Clinton? Well, his campaign’s fascinating to a student of politics.
> It's disturbing to someone who cares about certain issues. But
> politically, it seems to be working," said Obama.
Doug