[lbo-talk] Obamauration

ken hanly northsunm at yahoo.com
Fri Jan 23 07:30:16 PST 2009


So do you think the premise is incorrect that in a class society the interests of the ruling class must be paramount? What is your ground for thinking it is false? Of course some concern must be shown for other classes' interests or else the stability or very existence of capitalism would be threatened. It is also in ruling class interest for the populace to think that an administration could be non-ideological. This phraseology which implies neutrality has variations: non-partisan, non-political etc.

Blog: http://kenthink7.blogspot.com/index.html Blog: http://kencan7.blogspot.com/index.html

--- On Fri, 1/23/09, Max B. Sawicky <sawicky at verizon.net> wrote:


> From: Max B. Sawicky <sawicky at verizon.net>
> Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] Obamauration
> To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org
> Date: Friday, January 23, 2009, 6:22 AM
> Given your premise -- "in which the interests . . .
> " -- you're right, it doesn't make sense.
>
>
> ken hanly wrote:
> > How can there be a non-ideological administration in a
> class society in which the interests of the ruling class
> must be paramount for the administration? This makes no
> sense at all to me.
> >
> > Cheers, K hanly
> >
> > Blog: http://kenthink7.blogspot.com/index.html
> > Blog: http://kencan7.blogspot.com/index.html
> >
> >
> > --- On Thu, 1/22/09, Max B. Sawicky
> <sawicky at verizon.net> wrote:
> >
> >> From: Max B. Sawicky <sawicky at verizon.net>
> >> Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] Obamauration
> >> To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org
> >> Date: Thursday, January 22, 2009, 7:04 AM
> >> James Heartfield wrote:
> >>> This is a bit impressionistic, but rushing
> through the
> >> LBO reaction to Obama's inauguration, the
> chasm between
> >> that and the reactions to his election seems huge.
> Shouldn't we go back over
> >> what we all said then, and compare it with the
> >> hyper-critical reaction to him now?
> >> I feel as though I was too critical then, and a
> bit
> >> distanced from the criticisms made of him here,
> now. Is the
> >> disappointment relative to the
> >> great hopes placed in the man? Are the
> disappointments a
> >> bit overdone? He is not left wing, clearly that is
> the case.
> >> But then why should
> >> we have thought otherwise?
> >>> I still think that Obama's election
> represents a
> >> sea-change in America's race politics, and one
> for the
> >> good. Is that naive?
> >>> His cabinet choices don't seem to me to
> say that
> >> he is right wing, but rather that he is trying to
> supercede
> >> the left-right political divide, a bit like Tony
> Blair did here in 1997. The danger in that
> >> is not right wing politics, but the creation of an
> >> apolitical technocratic administration.
> >> Seeing the popular mobilisation behind the
> presidency it
> >> might seem odd to say it, but the outcome of this
> apolitical
> >> administration is a retreat
> >> from democratic contestation, where dissent is
> >> marginalised.
> >>> ___________________________________
> >> The question will be, does centrist or pragmatist
> really
> >> mean non-ideological, or merely ideology in a
> different
> >> guise.
> >> If truly non-ideological, then the Admin will be
> driven
> >> without prejudice to solutions that work, which
> could mean
> >> some
> >> radical stuff with the advantage of being dressed
> in
> >> unradical clothes. For instance, I wouldn't
> be
> >> surprised to see some
> >> nationalized banks (the issue there is one of
> compensation
> >> or lack thereof), though they would doubtless be
> sold back
> >> after reorganization. The Blair analogy is a good
> one,
> >> though it would be like dropping Blair into this
> new unique
> >> historical moment.
> >>
> >> I don't think anybody knows how the race
> dimension will
> >> play out, only that something new is in store.
> >>
> >> Technocratic does not strike me as so bad,
> relatively
> >> speaking, but maybe that's because I'm a
> technocrat.
> >>
> >> As for dissent, from experience I can assure all
> that there
> >> is nobody more partisan and intolerant of dissent
> >> from left or right than trade unionists, to which
> we could
> >> minorities and today's raging liberal
> >> 'netroots.'
> >> It will be hard to criticize BHO for a while
> (politically,
> >> not in terms of substance), but at the same time
> >> once he disappoints them (on EFCA, for instance),
> things
> >> will get really interesting.
> >>
> >>
> >> ___________________________________
> >>
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
> > ___________________________________
> > http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
> >
> >
>
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list