All politics is local. That
political bromide, made popular by Thomas P. (Tip) O’Neill, contains
an important kernel of truth. Congressman Tip O’Neill from Massachusetts
once bragged he never forgot the name of a constituent, or even the
names of the constituent’s mother and father. While that talent
is impressive, it hardly qualifies him as a profound political thinker.
Nevertheless, he reminds us that political work to be successful must
begin not just at the state level, or even the congressional district
level but most importantly at the precinct level.
That is not to say that national
and international political analysis is irrelevant; in fact, it is key.
But political organizing must be grounded in local concerns, alliances,
and interests. Political organizing, however, quickly meets a brick
wall unless it has a national or even international perspective.
Because of the Democratic
Party’s persistent and consistent refusal to address the needs
and demands of its constituency, progressives turn in frustration to
direct action, demonstrations or third parties. That is always the motivation,
hopefully, of those who turn to alternative forms of political expression
and explains, again hopefully, the rise of the Green Party, the Labor
Party, and other political expressions of resistance to the established
order.
One hopes desperately that
people who turn to third parties are not motivated by personal ego,
petty jealousies or racism or any other of the more base human impulses.
But objective analysis requires recognition that a human process involves
all of these impulses. But because racism is a political statement that
has enormous consequences, particularly in this country, it is that
dilemma that must be addressed and resolved to have any hope of success
in changing this country.
We can now officially acknowledge
that the Republican Party, led by the aggressively opportunist Bush
cabal, is the white people’s party. After a 35-year campaign of
wedge politic, i.e. hate politics, the Bush cabal seized power in 2000
by illegally disqualifying 80,000 to 100,000 Black voters in Florida.
Nixon established the Southern
strategy and vicious attack politics as the modus operandi of the Republican
Party but it was Ronald Reagan who made the definitive move to capture
the hearts and minds of the most reactionary and racist section of white
people in this country. By opening his presidential campaign in Philadelphia,
Mississippi, he openly proclaimed that the Republican Party condoned
the terroristic suppression of the Black community and with that symbolic
statement, he won the South for the Republican Party.
The location of Reagan’s
opening shot, of course, was the same area where Goodman, Schwerner
and Chaney were murdered for trying to register Blacks to vote.
By combining violent suppression with political activity, Reagan endorsed
the violent terroristic attacks on the Black community for its attempt
to exercise the most basic of democratic rights. Neither the media nor
the Democratic Party took him to task for such an outrageous political
posture. As a result, the Republican Party’s plunge into racism
and hatred was sealed.
Of course, any historical
dividing line is imprecise and insufficient. The Republican Party has
carried a majority of the white vote since 1968 after President Johnson
passed the Civil Rights Act and Bobby Kennedy, and Martin Luther King
were assassinated. Jack Lessenbury correctly observes:
“Yes, the last
Republican convention had blacks and Hispanics prominently on display
as window dressing. But that is all that they were, other than
a way to make socially aware voters feel better about the Republicans.
When Election Day came, Al Gore won the virtually unanimous support
of African-American voters everywhere in the country. He also won
something like three-quarters of the Hispanic vote, except for Florida’s
Cubans, and high percentages of other minorities.” Metro Times
(8/13-19/2003, p.5) (Emphasis added)
The window dressing, however,
is important. Appealing to the most reactionary and racists elements
of this country would make the Republican Party a small minority party
particularly given the political program of the Republican Party. The
program of the Republican Party addresses only the needs of the wealthiest
people in this country, and basically robs the rests of the population.
It can only carry the rest by pandering to racism, male supremacy and
homophobia. All this careful maneuvering is done through the skillful
use of coded messages that generate the necessary hatred in order to
hide the true political agenda. Hatred is a powerful emotion that blinds
white working people from their economic self-interest.
The Democratic Party takes
the absolutely wrong approach. Instead of solidifying its base by building
a program that addresses the country’s racist history, current
racial unfairness and then building bridges to the progressive impulses
within the white working class, it tries to send its own pseudo coded
racist messages. That leaves progressives within the Democratic Party
an open field. Instead, too many progressives abandon that open field
and set up new basically all white organizations. Nevertheless, the
contradiction can be exploited if white progressives are willing to
enter the Democratic Party and organize, accepting leadership from the
powerful African-American leadership within the party. The economic
realities will force recognition within the white working class where
its economic self-interest lies.
“A three-sentence
description of the arc of American politics over the past 70 years
would run like this: First, Democrats and moderate Republicans created
institutions—above all Social Security and Medicare—that
provided a measure of financial security to ordinary working Americans.
The biggest beneficiaries of these institutions were African-Americans
and working-class Southern whites, and both were part of the moderate-to-liberal
coalition that dominated American politics until the 1960’s.”
But the right opened an
increasingly effective counterattack, with a strategy that included
using racially charged symbolism to get Southern whites to vote against
their own economic interests.
“The big story in
that election [November, 2000] was the victory of Republicans in Mississippi
and Kentucky. The secondary story, however, was a string of victories
by affluent suburban areas in the Northeast. In my state, New Jersey,
Democrats took firm control of the state’s Legislature.
What this tells us is that
some people—either in New Jersey, Mississippi or both –voted
against their economic interests. For whatever you think of Bush’s
economic plan, it’s clearly much better for New Jersey—a
rich state, which gains a lot from tax cuts tilted toward the affluent—than
for a poor state like Mississippi.” Paul Krugman, NYT, 11/07/03,
p.23
There were several elements
of the forged coalition of working class whites (not just in the South)
and African-Americans. First, the depression framed the necessity for
such unity. The depression represented the total failure of capitalism.
Second, the worldwide revolutionary movement frightened liberals more
than poverty. At the time, the progressive movement in this country
pushed an anti-racist agenda inside the union movement and even within
the Democratic Party itself.
World War II destroyed productive
forces throughout the world and concentrated enormous capital in the
hands of a few groups in this country. These groups consolidated their
power, gave certain benefits to workers, and purged communists and other
progressives from unions, universities, schools and every other possible
institutional setting. Facing a devastating criticism from the Soviet
Union and progressive forces in this country of Jim Crow segregation,
these same forces had to dismantle racist institutions in the South.
That allowed corporations to move south where low pay and an antiunion
culture predominated, and was profitable.
The Democratic Party then
became a strange structure with African-Americans as the base and an
uncomfortable white leadership at the top. With its form of racism,
this white leadership vacillated between an opportunistic use of the
Black vote and a programmatic addressing of its needs. But it never
addressed in any systematic matter the protection of the political and
economic rights of minorities within its constituency. Nor did it formulate
an openly anti-racist agenda. Instead it moved more and more to the
right. Calling it a move to the “center”, the Democratic
Party more and more ignored its base.
Disgusted with the opportunism
of the Democratic Party, white progressive either left or acted in organizations
outside the Party to influence it. That left the power oriented Republican
Party able to exploit the contradictions within the Democratic Party.
That is why the wedge politics or hate politics has been so effective.
But it is also why the Republican Party is now the white people’s
party. Republicans, of course, must deny or hide their racist foundation.
White progressives acting within the Democratic Party could forge an
anti-racist agenda and expose the
Republican Party.
Outside the Democratic Party
they become marginalized and often are more “white” than
the Republican Party. The Republican Party continues to deny its whiteness
with no alternative institution to expose it. But that denial will ring
hollow as time and information reveals the invalidity of its claims.
“Winton claims, however,
that the GOP had a breakthrough year among Hispanics. He cites as
evidence a drop in Hispanic support for Congressional Democrats and
rise in support for Republicans between 2000 and 2002. While Winston’s
data for 2002 are wrong and exaggerate this change, it is true that
the Hispanic two party House vote was 65 percent Democratic/35 percent
Republican in 2000 and did fall modestly to 62 percent /38 percent
in 2002. However, Hispanic support for House Democrats traditionally
falls at least several points from a Presidential to an off-year election,
so this says little about a real trend toward Republicans. The more
pertinent comparison is to 1998, the last off-year election, where
Hispanics supported Democrats 63 percent to 37 percent. So, basically,
we have shift in off-year Democratic support from 63/37 to 62/38.
If that’s a trend, Public Opinion will eat his calculator.
Well, what about the Senate
races? These were the most significant races in 2002 and perhaps a
pro-GOP surge can be detected here. Nope, the Senate two party vote
among Hispanics was 67 percent Democratic/33 percent Republican. Governors,
then? Not here, either—Democratic support among Hispanics was
a healthy 65 percent to 35 percent.
What about other minorities?
Not much luck here either for the GOP. In fact, blacks and Asians
both appear to have increased their support for Democrats. The two
party black vote for the House went from 89 percent Democrat/11 percent
Republican in both 1998 and 2000 to a 91 percent/9 percent split in
2002. And Asians increased their support dramatically for House Democrats
going from 56 percent Democratic/44 percent Republican in 1998 to
60 percent/40 percent in 2000 to 66 percent/34 percent in 2002!
Much more “progress”
like this among minority voters and the GOP—aka “the white
people’s party”—will have a very limited future
indeed. Ruy Teixeira, Mid-Term Myths of the 2002 Election. TomPaine.commonsense.http///www.tompaine.com/feature2.cfm/ID/9098/view/print.
Like it or not political
discussion occurs in this context. Third parties either reach for some
big name like Ralph Nader and are therefore bound to his perspective
or work in anonymity at the local level. And they remain as segregated
as the Republican Party. Even though the long term prospects of the
Republican Party are limited, it will do enormous damage in the meantime.
As will be discussed, later, the Republican Party will consolidate its
power through strongarm tactics and election fraud. The identification
of this rightwing, probably fascist force, as the enemy of our democracy
is only the first step.
The damage done by the Bush
cabal is clear and horrendous: 1) rejection of the repetitive injury
standard for workers; 2) the withdrawal from Kyoto; 3) the unpunished
and unexamined fraud of Enron; 4) the withdrawal from the International
Conference on Racism; 5) the refusal to support the International Criminal
Court; 6) the appointment of vicious rightwing judges who will dismantle
protections for workers, women, and minorities; 7) the undermining of
constitutional protections including but not limited to the use of noncombatant
detainee status and the attack on entire sections of our population;
7) the attack on the separation of church and state; 8) broad scale
wiretapping, etc, etc, etc; 8) the elimination of 2,500,000 manufacturing
jobs, the first president since Hubert Hoover to have a net loss of
jobs; 9) the sacking of the American treasury by huge tax cut for the
rich; 10) the transition from surplus to deficit to the tune of 500
billion dollars. The list goes on and on with a specific attack on the
environment accomplished by a multitude of executive orders, etc.
But in a separate category,
the Bush cabal is guilty of the murderous unilateral attack on Afghanistan
and Iraq killing thousands and thousands and thousands of people first
as an excuse not to deal with Saudi Arabia and then as an attempt to
steal oil. Lies are used to cover the misdeeds and lies are used to
cover the lies, all with the willing compliance of the media.
The propagandistic media
has never mentioned the word “mandate”, a requirement for
dramatic change in a democracy. Because the propagandistic media refused
to discuss whether the Bush cabal had a mandate for radical, reactionary
change, our democracy has been brutally damaged. Any effort by the progressive
movement will be first to fight for democracy and that has a majority
constituency in this country. Benito Mussolini defined fascism as corporate
control of government. Of course, German fascism included a racist perspective.
The Bush cabal embodies both elements with propaganda to hide both elements
of their program.
The Bush cabal is the enemy
as is the rightwing movement that supports his seizure of power. The
destructive power of this coalition of forces is undeniable. The above
list, in fact, is incomplete and inadequate. It only touches the wreckage
that has been done, the institutions dismantled, the lives destroyed
and the capital wasted.
While the wreckage done by
the Bush cabal is awesome, it is not surprising. Any serious analysis
of the reactionary movement in this country could easily have predicted
the devastation. Yet, knowing the dangers presented, thousands and thousands
of people, overwhelmingly white and a majority progressive, turned to
third party alternatives or ignored the entire process. Energized as
never before, the African-American community had the political sophistication
to understand the peril presented and the vulnerability of our democracy.
Under tremendous attack in Florida, this community was able to increase
its vote substantially which required the Bush cabal to steal the election
and not allow the counting of the votes.
As previously documented,
the groups that constitute the backbone of the working class movement
voted overwhelmingly for the Democratic Party. The African-American
community is the core of the working class. This community not only
performs most of the most oppressive and poorly paid jobs; this community
is also a key element of the trade union movement. Whether it is the
demand for a stronger union movement or women’s liberation, this
community will be the political base. The unity of working people is
the only basis for change. As Abraham Lincoln said: “The strongest
bond of human sympathy, outside the family relation, should be one uniting
all working people of all nations and kindred.”
The unity of African-Americans
(92% Democratic); Hispanic (63% Democratic) women (at least 60% Democratic);
Asians (66% Democratic) is key to any progressive movement. The political
and cultural expression of that unity is inside the Democratic Party.
The struggle will be to unite that political unity with progressives
and force the Democratic leadership to accept and respect its political
base. Yet, progressives consistently refuse to unite politically with
this constituency.
Instead, the Green Party
creates another white people’s party, runs Ralph Nader who has
1% of his vote from minorities and assists in visiting untold misery
on the working class. The Nation magazine carries a headline on its
front page that Democrats are an endangered species in the South. Democrats
are not an endangered species; white Democrats are rare. But millions
of Blacks support the Democratic Party, and they are not irrelevant
as is consistently implied. They get almost no assistance from the white
leadership of the Democratic Party.
The Bush cabal provides a
good example of the differences in strategy:
“Mr. Bernier’s
program is part of a network of conservative-minded local radio shows
in politically important states on which campaign officials are heard
daily, programs like ‘Mid-Day with Charlie Sykes’ in Milwaukee,
‘The Martha Zoller Show’ in Atlanta and ‘The Jerry
Bowyer Program’ in Pittsburgh.
It is a network that
the Democrats do not have -- though they are trying to cultivate one
-- and one that Mr. Bush’s campaign strategists believe will
give him an edge in an election that could go to whichever side best
mobilizes its core voters.
Presidents have used radio
to reach voters virtually since its invention. But strategists and
radio experts say the Bush campaign has taken it to a new level of
sophistication, using it far earlier in the campaign cycle and appearing
regularly on shows with even the tiniest of audiences.” (New
York Times 12/29/03, Page 1 – Emphasis added)
This example provides an
example not only of weakness of the Democratic Party, but also the racist
ideology that underlies that weakness. There exists a tremendous network
of Black, and Hispanic radio stations that would effective contrast
the Republican and Democratic Party approaches: Tom Joyner, Tavis Smiley
and others speak to millions of people every day. Given support, that
audience would broaden and take on ever more political clout.
“LOS ANGELES –
A sign that Tavis Smiley’s new PBS talk show is not standard-issue
for public television: The set was created by tennis star and aspiring
designer Venus Williams.
That’s just the start.
Smiley, retuning to TV less than two years after he was canned by
BET, says his daily late-night series debuting next month will be
more than visually striking.
‘Tavis Smiley,’
PBS’ first West Coast-based talk show, will be fast-paced and
aimed at drawing a younger, more ethnically diverse audience than
typically watches public TV, its host says.
Smiley, whose punchy, baritone
delivery and pointed questions are familiar to his growing National
Public Radio audience, is ready to get back on the tube. (His radio
program, aired locally at 9 a.m. weekdays on WDET-FM (101.9) will
continue)
Smiley says he intends
his program to be the same kind of forum he’s created on NPR’s
‘The Tavis Smiley Show,’ one that challenges its audience
to consider issues from new viewpoints and addresses over-looked issues.
‘I want to use
this show, as I try to do on my NPR show, to introduce Americans to
each other. In many ways, we still live in a very segregated country,’
he says.
Recently, Smiley examined
heavy opposition by black Americans to the war in Iraq.
Not everyone is impressed
by his ecumenical efforts. Last year, National Review managing editor
Jay Nordlinger referred unadmiringly to Smiley as ‘the black
leftist radio personality.’
His reach is increasing.
His NPR show, which started with 16 stations in January 2002, has
enjoyed one of the fastest NPR expansions ever to major markets
and now is carried on more than 80 stations and reaches an audience
of more than 1 million.
He has brought in a somewhat
younger crowd and definitely attracted more blacks listeners –
30 per cent of his audience, compared to about 5 percent for most
other NPR shows.” Lynn Elber, the Detroit News, 12/29/03, Page
60 – Emphasis added)
The Democratic Party could
easily tap into this network if it was willing openly to confront the
racism of the Republican network.
The Democratic Party leadership
consistently refuses to build the party at the precinct level, choosing
instead to rely on rich donors to then buy advertisements. We have this
terrible spectacle of Democrats going to bunch of rich people to raise
money to give to the rich media to get its message to the people. No
wonder the message is so weak. The Republican Party has more money but
instead builds its party from the ground up. The reason is obvious.
To build the Democratic Party from the ground up would require putting
a lot of money and political muscle into the Black community. And the
party and apparently progressives are afraid of that. The Black community
is then left twisting in the wind.
That political fact represents
a tremendous opportunity for the progressive community. Green Party
activists are not barred from participating in the Democratic Party.
They could run for precinct delegate, unite with the large representation
of the minority communities and force the Democratic Party to be responsive
to its base. In fact, that could be done as the Green Party because
there is no prohibition against dual membership. Then, when an independent
candidacy is realistic, it would have the ability to forge the necessary
alliances. But that would require engaging Black delegates as equals
or more importantly to accept their leadership based on their power
within the Party.
The Labor Party could do
the same, and so could every other progressive group. All of this could
be done without losing any group identity. The Democratic Party has
an organized, national delegate system in place ready for organization,
especially since the leadership is afraid of mobilizing its base.
Yet progressives continue
to cling to the myth that there is no difference between the two parties.
Once they start organizing in the predominantly Democratic precincts,
it would soon become clear that there is an enormous difference. Undoubtedly,
Green Party and Labor Party activists live in primarily white communities.
That would make them minorities in most of those communities. That would
make it easier for them to be elected precinct delegates. But it would
also require that they confront the racism in those communities and
raise money to empower the base of the Party.
Instead, the third party
movement expects the base of the Democratic Party that is multinational
and working class to move into their parties and accept a new white
leadership. What form of racism is that—it needs a new name.
There are two coterminous
changes in this country that require immediate attention by progressives
and require immediate movement into the Democratic Party. First, redistricting
by the Republican Party has now made almost all congressional districts
safe seats with a majority going into the Republican Party. Second,
the combination of money, fraud, and coercion has made almost all elections
rigged. The use of computer voting machines with no paper trail and
owned by partisan Republican corporations has resulted in elections
that are turned upside down without any reason other than the fraudulent
control of machines. Max Cleland in Georgia, Janet Reno in Florida and
the senator from Nevada are glaring examples.
“Roxanne Jekot, who
has put much of her professional and life on hold to work on the issue
full time, puts even more strongly. ‘Corporate America is very
close to running this country. The only thing stopping them from taking
total control are the pesky voters. That’s why there’s
such a drive to control the vote. What we’re seeing is the corporatization
of the last shred of democracy.
I feel that unless we stop
it here and stop it now ‘ she says, ‘my kids won’t
grow to have a right to vote at all.’ Andrew Grunbel, Published
on 10/13/03 by the Independent/UK.”
The article by Andrew Grunbel
is too long to quote but begins with the following synopsis:
“A quiet revolution
is taking place in US politics. By the time it’s over, the integrity
of elections will be in the unchallenged, unscrutinized control of
a few large - and pro-republican - corporations.”
In addition, the following
is a quote from An Open Letter to America: It’s Time to Take Back
our Country by John and Elaine Mellancamp.
“The vote count was
not conducted by state election officials, but by private company
that sold Georgia the voting machines in the first place, under a
strict trade-secrecy contract that made it not only difficult but
actually illegal—on pain of stiff criminal penalties—for
the state to touch the equipment or examine the proprietary software
to ensure the machines worked properly. There was not even a paper
trail to follow up. The machines were fitted with thermal printing
devices that could theoretically provide a written record of voters’
choices, but these were not activated. Consequently, recounts were
impossible. Had Diebold Inc, the manufacturer, been asked to review
the votes, all it could have done was program the computers to spit
out the same data as before, flawed or not. Astonishingly, these are
the terms under which America’s top three computer voting machine
manufacturers—Diebold, Sequoia, and Election Systems and Software
(ES&S-have sold their products to elections officials around the
country.”
Republican money has now
taken over California and will rig the election for Bush II in 2004.
It is at least interesting
to observe subtleties of this process of distorting and cooking the
election results.
“Let’s hear
it for California’s secretary of state, Kevin Shelley. Based
on the findings of a public task force, he has now decided that all
electronic voting machines used in his state must print out a paper
receipt. Inexplicably, Shelley postpones implementation to the 2006
election.” Jim Hightower’s Lowdown, Vol. 5, #12 (12/03)
(Emphasis added)
That probably will insure
that Bush II can steal the 2004 presidential election. The only place
where progressives have a chance to act is in the Democratic precincts
and primaries. Most of the other elections will be controlled by rich
corporate Republicans. With a war chest approaching $1,000,000,000.00,
Bush II can buy the election, and that’s what the Bush cabal intends
to do. Even if, by some wild chance, a Democrat were to be allowed in
the presidency, the media attack dogs would not allow that president
to have any effect whatsoever.
Because the Republican media
will make sure to hide the stolen election and put a spin on these rigged
elections, progressives will have a wide-open field to show the courage
to fight that the Democratic leadership lacks.
One of two things will happen
in November of 2004. Either the Bush cabal will steal or buy the election
using computer control to steal key states, or a Democratic President
will be allowed to be elected. In the latter case, such a President
will be paralyzed by the media attack dogs who will make it impossible
for the elected President to govern.
Under either scenario, progressives
will have to build a base inside the Democratic Party. Such a movement
will address the question of marginalization that now exists. Progressives,
if effective, can speak for the Democratic Party, showing the courage
that the current leadership lacks.
While the Democratic Party
will have a majority of the votes, and certainly a majority of the working
class votes, it will have a minority of power and a minority of positions.
The Democratic leadership will weekly protest the fraud and unfairness
of the system. In those circumstances, progressives will have fertile
ground to till especially as the Democratic leadership continues to
ignore its base. Taking leadership at the base will enable progressives
to support mobilization of that base with direct action, civil disobedience
and strike activity.
This strategy is increasingly
important because the Republican Party leadership intends to dismantle
the entire governmental structure that supports working people. The
recent Medicare bill was passed with no debate and is designed to require
destruction in 2011. Ted Kennedy describes this as the Trojan horse
strategy. (See Paul Krugman NYT 121/14/03 p A25)
Even Head Start is under
attack. With a Republican attack, it is now fighting for its existence.
“Facing an increasingly
raw fight over the future of Head Start, Congressional Republicans
asked the General Accounting Office today to examine the federal government’s
financial oversight of the program, which serves almost one million
preschoolers who live in poverty.” NYT, 11/20/03 p. A22
In these circumstances, the
Black Panther Program of feeding the children becomes, again, an important
part of the political struggle, and the struggle will be multinational,
potentially revolutionary
In addition, the Republican
economic program continuously concentrates wealth in fewer and fewer
people, which leaves a bigger and bigger constituency for progressives.
The Republicans always concentrate first on activating its base. As
Bush II said in January of 2000: “you can fool some of the people
all the time and those are the ones we concentrate on.”
The strategy of the Republican
Party is to solidify its base and tell enough lies, make enough appeals
to racism, male supremacy and homophobia to steal elections
“The thirteen states
in which ‘sodomy’ laws were struck down by the Supreme
Court were all states that Bush carried in his first election. But
the Republicans’ decision to embrace political homophobia anew
is more than simply a sop to the Christers and the far right—given
that antigay backlash; it’s shrewd political strategy. Karl
Rove never tires of pointing out that 4 million of the 19 million
evangelical Christians didn’t vote in 2000. With 2004 shaping
up as another close elections, Rove & Co want to energize the
Christian-right base to which Bush is already so heavily indebted
(it motored his 2000 primary victories against John McCain) and insure
a maximum turnout among the AWOL evangelicals and other Christian
traditionalists.” Doug Ireland, Republicans Relaunch the Antigay
Culture Wars, Nation, 10/20/03 p22.
The base of hate politics
is racism in this country. The response to such hate politics is first
to consolidate the base—that is, to address the question of racism,
the Republican Party’s reliance on racism and the other hate politics
and then address the economic strategy that underpins the reason for
hate politics. That can be done by forcing the Democratic Party to address
its base just as the Republican Party always caters first to its right
wing white base before it addresses other issues.
Certainly, progressives cannot
address the question of racism in this county by promoting another form
of racism. The African-American community represents a powerful voting
block inside the Democratic Party and also understands that the Democratic
Party’s white leadership has refused to recognize that base. That
is why some of the more reactionary and opportunists elements inside
the Black community have become Republicans or pork chop nationalists
or both.
Progressives need to look
ahead. There are only two possible scenarios in 2004. Probably, the
Bush cabal will steal the election. In those circumstances, progressives
must build the Democratic Party base to confront the fascist movement
that will emerge once Bush II consolidates power.
With the remote possibility
that a Democrat takes the presidency, he will not be allowed to govern.
The media attack dogs will immediately block all possible efforts to
repair the damage of the Bush cabal:
“From the beginning,
his enemies portrayed Clinton as unworthy to occupy the office of
president of the United States. This assessment held firm despite
his acknowledged intellect, industriousness, and charm, and also despite
the fact that by almost every statistical measure, the American people
and their government were in far better condition by 1999 than when
the Arkansan took office in 1993. With is remarkable political skills,
the president had broken the Republican ‘lock” n the electoral
votes of the southern states, muted his own ‘party’s clamorous
left wing, adapted portions of the Republican agenda to how own uses,
restored fiscal discipline, and outmaneuvered his bitterest foes in
the GOP leadership again and again. But the better the president and
the country did, the more his adversaries appeared willing to endorse
almost anything short of assassination to do him in.” (p xiii
– Emphasis added) The Hunting of the President, The Ten-Year
Campaign to Destroy Bill & Hillary Clinton, Joe Conason &
Gene Lyons (St. Martin’s Press, NY)
If a Democratic president
is elected, progressives must make it impossible to silence the “clamorous
left wing”. If Bush II is elected, progressives must mobilize
the Democratic base to attack the fascist moves that most certainly
will come.
The beauty of the current
constellation of forces is that progressives can now seize the moral
high ground and speak for the majority needs and dreams of people in
this country. We need only the courage and vision to seize the time.
Yours in Struggle,
Ronald D. Glotta
220 Bagley, Suite 808
Detroit MI 48226-1409
(313) 963-1320 (313) 963-1325/Fax
rglotta@glottaassociates.com
