http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/marxism/2008-April/026811.html
Fred wrote:
Ruthless can hear condescension in and contempt in Obama's
criticism but not at all in Clinton's and McCain's orgies of praise for
the
decent, hard-working, glorious, salt of the earth, patriotic, fantasy-
or
really gun-toting "middle class"
Clueless responded:
Of course *I* recognize McCain's or Clinton's condescension. That is
not the point here. The point is that the objects of condescension do
not recognize it. (If they did, why would they have voted twice for
Bush, who condescended to them just as McCain or Clinton do?)
The point is that intellectualized-seeming, professorial-seeming
condescension (as in Gore's or Obama's) does not pass muster in the
USA. Condescension disguised in populist rhetoric (as in Bush's,
McCain's or Clinton's) passes muster.
And Fred responds:
Note Clueless' version of US history. To hear him tell it, Gore lost
because
he was viewed as intellectual. But Gore won the popular vote, that is,
he
outvoted Bush. And the entire election hinged in the end on the
electoral
votes of Florida, where a Republican state machine seems pretty clearly
to
have stolen the election. In 2004, Clueless seriously believes that
Kerry
was defeated by a video of him windsurfing, which someone or other is
supposed to have regarded as condescending to people who don't
windsurf, and
of course Clueless is completely unaware of the fact that debates still
rage
over methods that were used to block Kerry from winning in Ohio, which
would
have given HIM the electoral college even though he was behind (but
hardly
nonexistent, as Clueless' analyses would suggest - the result was
fairly
close) in the popular vote.
And on this basis, Clueless confidently pronounces that no
self-respecting
white worker will vote for Obama and he is "unelectable."
And by the way, does anybody notice the awesome condescension toward
white
working people in Clueless's comments. ("They" voted for Bush in 2000
and
2004, therefore THEY (this undivided body of white workers whish is
today
presented as voting only as a bloc, like the denizens of that one white
bar
in Levittown) will vote, in the last analysis, for McCain after Clinton
has
finished off Obama.
Okay, now for some further information for Clueless. The United States
is
not, as he imagines (and I am sure he is not alone) history-less. They
voted
for Bush in 2000-2004 (leaving aside whether THEY did or not. Therefore
they
will vote the same way again and Obama is "unelectable" and we should
support candidates from non-imperialist parties -- advice we don't
need
because almost all of us, including myself, are already doing that).
What happened in 2000 and 2004 is not likely to be repeated exactly
again.
In the interim, all the key policies of Clinton-Bush have collapsed
(globalization, financialization, war against social security beginning
with
the abolition of welfare as we knew it, war against Iraq, intensified
blockade of Cuba, war on the table against Iran) have come acropper.
It is clueless, Clueless, to treat this as irrelevant to this election.
It
is clueless, Clueless, not to look for change rather than to
confidently
assume sameness.
Of course, I have to be more patient myself. My view of the endless
stability of American politics was corrupted by my participation in
the
Black liberation struggle in the 1960s and the antiwar movement, and
the
socialist movement, such as it was. I see what is going on around the
Obama
campaign as an indication of the beginnings of change. Frankly and
ultimately, I don't care whether he is "electable" or not. I support
McKinney. But I have seen change and I know it is possible, including
among
white workers.
Unfortunately, and not really his fault, this is totally outside
Clueless'
imaginative reach today. But it is happening today nonetheless, I
think.
Fred Feldman
_______________________________________________
Marxism-Thaxis mailing list
Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis
