> Sure, and we wouldn't stop them. But Doug's point -- with which I agree
> -- is that the purpose of a left is to move politics to the left. And you
> do that from outside the political process, by building a movement that
> exerts force on politicians.
I view the political process as involving both electoral politics and and non-electoral politics. They are different and contradictory, but not mutually exclusive. Both are means to distributing political power among classes, groups, individuals -- i.e. distributing the productive force of labor applied to introducing, sustaining, or dissolving legal and political structures.
> It doesn't mean you don't care who gets
> elected. It means you care more about how you can influence them before
> and after they get elected, when the real decisions are made.
It seems to me that the real decisions are made before, *during*, and after. Things can change in mid course. I believe that the social and political significance of the Obama campaign has changed *during*.
And it will continue to change.
> It means
> leftists should put their energy into creating something that changes the
> discourse and that politicians have to take notice of.
Yes, that's a matter of course. Again, electoral politics doesn't exclude non-electoral politics. People use different vehicles to advance their interest. Properly used, they may reinforce each other.
> Elections, from
> our point of view, are mainly the expression and ratification of the
> constellation of social and political forces.
I don't totally disagree with this. I'd just add that the electoral process is not a mere passive reflection of the constellation of social and political forces, since the constellation shifts and the electoral process can contribute -- sometimes even decisively -- to shifting that constellation. So, I insist, it's wasteful to disconnect radical propaganda from political agitation, which in the today's conditions in the U.S. can only be centered on the electoral process.
> Real politics is about
> changing that constellation. And it's a defining belief of the left that
> mostly that's not done by politicians; that mostly they are the acted
> upon, not the actors; that real change is produced by social movements.
What I don't understand is why the "real political" propagandistic and organizational work is counter-posed to the (by implication, "non real") electoral process. I don't know of cases (in rich countries, with long-standing bourgeois democratic institutions) where that kind of work, disconnected from electoral politics, has born sizable and lasting results.