Ralph Dumain Reading this drivel makes me ill. Rochelle Riley is an idiot. While I agree with the anti-Hillary remarks, the level of superficiality exhibited here demonstrates why America, a nation of mental couch potatoes incapable of reacting to anything other than market manipulation, will never get its act together. America did and will not come close to achieving Dr. King's dream, because Dr. King did not die for buppie ambitions. And the dream was killed off a long time ago; the Obama campaign has nothing to do with it. Hillary is a typical politician; it just so happens that her tactics for exploiting every advantage sink to the level they do, but then, what would you expect? The entire primary season, once Edwards was eliminated, was bound to be based solely upon shallow symbolic manipulation with we the people as guinea pigs for responding like Pavlovian dogs to whatever emotional massage floats our boat. Both candidates are weak and vulnerable to getting picked off, and so far neither stands for much that is substantial, and the fact that we are reduced to this level indicates the severe danger that American democracy is in.
^^^^ CB: So , you think there has been a lot of American democracy ? ^^ The real "mystery" is not the various reasons why certain demographics do not gravitate to Obama, and these are not solely racial reasons though they do loom large, but why any working class people would give Hillary a minute of their time. I think it's mainly because those who cling to whatever they cling to also cling to the illusion of the Democratic Party in general, and thus to whoever seems to be most solidly entrenched as a strong representative of that party, even though the party deserted their class interests thirty years ago. The 'untried and untested line', along with the other symbolic pseudo-issues, will work for certain demographics. But ultimately, loyalty to either Clinton or Obama could not be more shallow or baseless. Curiously, the analysis last night on Charlie Rose, dissecting the minutiae of this campaign with excruciating exactitude and incisiveness, was fascinating, given how far removed I am from anything that concerns any of these people. All participants had interesting things to say about the psycho-ideological dynamics at play here, without any special pleading. The black reporter from the New York Times was as ruthlessly objective as anyone could be, and it may have been he who pointed out that both were weak candidates. ^^^^ CB: Give us an example of a strong candidate in recent times . ^^^^ Of course, no one could say, without violating the strict limits of public discourse, why these are the only choices we have, or why we are in the pickle we are in, but there is something to be learned about the symbolic playing field upon which these scenarios are acted out. Since I don't follow everyone's chit-chat, I wonder if progressives and the left are doing much better. They don't seem to be very bright, either. ^^^^^ CB: Everybody's so dumb, and you're so smart. It's ashame you have to live a world that can't meet your mental standards. ^^^^^ Of course, our local Pacifica station is composed of morons, ^^^^ CB: Natch ^^^ but even they had a black journalist on this morning who was much more objective than most about the symbolic landscape and who made what bad moves or failed to make what good ones. The problem though is that this level of politics is so completely removed from critical thought or a genuine mass movement, it is worthless in the end ^^^^ CB: How could a mass movement of critical thinkers arise when everybody is so dumb ? This message has been scanned for malware by SurfControl plc. www.surfcontrol.com _______________________________________________ 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
