[lbo-talk] Signs of the times

wrobert at uci.edu wrobert at uci.edu
Mon Sep 14 19:21:22 PDT 2009


Polls generally say otherwise, when asked about the general outline of what a plan ought to be, there is a lot of confusion about what the plan actually is (this might actually be a benefit to the plan, which is garbage.) I think the thing that gets lost in the conversation is actually how small these demonstrations were (from the beginning) given the kind of financial power and media access the organizers had to put them together. This is not to say that they weren't successful in creating a spectacle, but it certainly isn't a movement. I'm not saying there is some sort of silent leftist majority (there isn't) but there a broad if fairly incoherent support for reform (even if that is kind of Platte River broad....) robert wood


> Doug writes 'It's not even clear how many are "working class." I suspect a
> lot are
> what we used to call petit bourgeois.' in which case Myles comment that it
> is 'an economic version of Stockholm Syndrome' doesn't make quite so much
> sense.
>
> But granted that the active protestors are not working class, would you
> say that working class people are for health care reform? There is - as I
> think Michael Pollack said- a world of difference between where the
> British working class was when the NHS was introduced, but I get the
> feeling that there is something of an absence of a working class
> constituency for this reform, which is, as I think the original points
> about the demo were making, quite remarkable.
>
>
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>
>



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list