On 2010-10-08, at 1:36 PM, c b wrote:
>> CB: Obama ran promising to make socialist changes.
>
> I never said that! I said all along that he was a centrist Democrat in
> the DLC mold. He campaigned rather honestly in that fashion. Charles,
> I fear you're losing contact with Planet Earth.
>
> Doug
>
> ^^^
> CB: Well, its kind of squirrelly the way you do it. _Now_ after the
> campaign , you claim that he is breaking his campaign promises. Why
> would you do that if he had run as a DLC candidate ?
Yeah, I always understood both of you to say he was a centrist Democrat in the DLC mold. I think Hilary was the DLC's favoured candidate, until the primaries showed Obama's appeal to the base of the party and new young voters.
But FDR was also an establishment Democrat when he was elected (you don't get nominated if your politics are considered too radical for the party establishment). However, he and the DP were forced to the left by pressure from below and the convergent recognition by the liberal bourgeoisie that recovery from the depression required boosting mass purchasing power.
So I think expectations were high that the current crisis would force Obama to respond in similar fashion, or at least that significant structural reform could not be ruled out.
We haven't seen that, of course. The Obama administration has been very timid, which I attribute to the lack of pressure from below from a militant socialist and trade union movement - a movement which no longer exists - and to the current crisis being as yet nowhere near as deep as during the 30's.
Charles has been unable to acknowledge how timid the administration has been, though I think he has been overreacting against Doug and others having from the beginning ruled out any possibility of liberal reform under Obama - or, rather, his perception that this has been their POV.
You may not be as far apart as you each claim the other to be.