the Left - they do not want to consider or negotiate at all. "
[WS:] I think it is a double misconception. First, the Left has no political power in the US, so the capitalists do not give a rat's ass about it. If their attack dogs engage in anti-left rhetoric, it is equivalent to the Orwellian "minute of hate" - or erecting a straw man and enticing their constituents to hate it, which apparently mobilizes this kind of people.
The second misconception is that the left is antithetical to capitalists' interests. It is not. In fact, the the capitalists need the left as useful idiots who will provide a "human face" for despicable capitalist policies e.g. Guggenheim's flick purporting to "save our children's future" as a cover up of dismantling and privatizing public education. If the capitalists simply stated "let's turn our schools into a money making machine" the public would probably object - so they need useful idiots who will convincingly argue that it is about some pie-in-the-sky ideal like saving people from some imaginary peril.
The Left, and do gooders in general, are very good at performing such a function. And since they have no real power, they can be simply pushed aside after they do their shtick, which further increases their usefulness to the capitalist class.
So if some right wing populist attack dog zealots went too far and really wanted to exterminate the left, I am pretty sure their capitalist bosses would reign them in. They need the left to legitmate their policies.
Wojtek
On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 12:25 PM, Nicholas Ruiz III
<editor at intertheory.org> wrote:
> Dear Citizens,
>
>
>
> I like Hedges' spirit:
>
>
>
> http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/the_world_liberal_opportunists_made_20101025/
>
>
>
> ...but some of his ideas are flawed and really not indicative of
> what is needed for progressive policy gains - which is what everyone
> here is after, right?
>
>
>
> For example, he writes:
>
>
>
> "And the rising right-wing populists, correctly, ask why liberals
> should be tolerated when their rhetoric bears no relation to reality
> and their presence has no influence on power...The liberals’
> disintegration ensures that the frustration and anger among the
> working and the middle class will find expression in a rejection of
> traditional liberal institutions and the civilities of a liberal
> democracy...The real enemy of the liberal class has never been Glenn Beck,
> but Noam Chomsky."
>
>
>
> Hedges here
> displays a radical misunderstanding of the Republican/Right agenda.
> They want tax cuts
> for the corporate class, and the further erosion of the U.S. Social
> Safety net, along with a deunionized, subervient worker class that
> smacks of feudal peasantry. They do not 'question' whether or not
> the Left should tolerated or considered in terms of diplomatic
> negotiation and policy construction. They do not want to share the
> power of representative government - they want to dictate the terms
> of American citizenship and livelihood in a very specific royalist
> and plutocratic way.
>
>
>
> The worst elements of the Right simply want to subsume and destroy
> the Left - they do not want to consider or negotiate at all. Still,
> progressives want to be represented - they simply cannot find
> representatives who will do so. That is our task at hand.
>
>
>
> Progressives
> are not 'converting' to the Right, as Hedges miscalculates. Rather,
> the Right is becoming more emboldened, with every passing moment
> that the Left is less politically active. This is the trend that
> must be reversed among the progressive community. Cannibalizing the
> Left, as Hedges does by blaming Noam Chomsky, is a failure to
> recognize the real problem for the Left: its lack of political leaders.
> There are plenty of great progressives writing great academic
> journalism, prose and poetry. But what we need right now, more than
> ever and in addition to the Hedges of the world - are progressive
> leaders who will legislate a progressive agenda. That is the boat
> that Hedges - and most of our progressive brethren - have missed.
>
>
>
> Hedges should have written a piece about all of the progressives,
> who are running for office across the nation, trying to make better
> of the situation he so often laments. If he and other writers did
> that small task - consider how much support they could garner for
> new political leaders. Imagine if he, or Michael Moore,
> or Keith Olbermann, or Jon Stewart,
> etc. - actively supported and endorsed, where possible, real
> candidates for real progressive agendas? How different would America
> be then?
>
>
>
> Hedges makes some great points, but that's only half of what we
> need.
>
>
>
> We need progressive leadership.
>
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
>
> Nicholas Ruiz III, Ph.D
> NRIII for Congress 2010
> http://intertheory.org/nriiiforcongress2010.html
> ____________________________________
> Editor, Kritikos
> http://intertheory.org
> ____________________________________
> Director, Florida Forum for Social Justice
> http://intertheory.org/ffsj.htm
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk