[lbo-talk] Obama and His Discontents

[Dissenting Wren]

Here's the rub.  The Democrats will never have to pay a price on the left unless there is a credible threat of defection on the left.  There are only two ways this can happen, AFAICT.  One would be abstention by the left, reflecting the judgment that the difference between Democrats and Republicans is large enough to make voting worthwhile.  The other would be a credible electoral vehicle to the Democrats' left.  The first would simply deliver more elections to the Republicans.  The second would deliver more elections to the Republicans for an indefinite period.  There are two successful scenarios for a third party (if the US keeps its  single-district first-past-the-post electoral system).  The first would be a gradual frittering away of Democratic support in favor of the third party (think Liberal Party and Labour Party in Britain).  The second would be a crisis that produces a sharp electoral realignment in a short period of time (think

 Whigs and Republicans in the U.S.)  The odds of either scenario working are very low, and those who support a third party are either dismissed as irrelevant or, in exception circumstances, blamed for Republican victories (Nader 2000).  Most leftists, therefore, stay out of electoral politics and focus on the Sisyphean task of putting on pressure from the outside (and their liberal allies desert them in this task when Democrats are in power).  Outside pressure sometimes works and sometimes doesn't, but the crucial variable isn't how hard the leftists work at it (imo it's how divided capitalists are).  If anyone knows a way out of this conundrum, please let me know.

________________________________
From: Doug Henwood <dhenwood at panix.com>
To: lbo-talk <lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org>
Cc: Progressive Economics <pen-l at lists.csuchico.edu>
Sent: Friday, July 29, 2011 8:29 AM
Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] Obama and His Discontents

On Jul 28, 2011, at 11:25 PM, Julio Huato wrote:


> Given the menu back then, voting for Obama was the right thing to do.
> In spite of your skepticism, you voted for Obama.  Whatever your
> rationale -- if it was good for you, why was it not so for others?  If
> one thinks that voting for Obama is better than the alternative, then
> why not call others to do the same?  It seems to me like wanting to
> have it both ways.

It's one thing to vote for the guy. It's another to waste a lot of time stumping for him and waste massive amounts of energy bloviating about his greatness. Expectations were hugely raised, and it was a year or more before he faced any significant criticism from the left. One of the reasons that he and other Dems can get away with playing to the right is that they never have to pay a price on the left. Unions will keep writing checks and providing campaign workers, environmental groups will go on about how much worse the GOP would be. (On the last, how about the way they suspended that EPA guy for reporting on polar bear death from climate change because it might interfere with drilling in the Arctic?)

Doug
___________________________________
http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk