====================================================================== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. ======================================================================
I think Mark nails it properly when he focuses on the issue of power-- the transitional demand is supposed to speak to the whole class, unite all sectors of the class around a demand that speaks to defending the class as a class from the depredations of the bourgeoisie during the economic contraction. The demands are supposed to speak to the exercise of class power against the extreme social impacts of capital's decline. In the example of health, I think Mark again has focused on some of the key issues.. I wouldn't spend a lot of time calling those who support the current iteration of the bill class-collaborationist, as that's not likely to upset them, or clarify the real issues at stake. But I don't think any iteration of the bill, even with Obama's public option, even with single payer could have been supported given that those iterations contained exclusions of immigrants from coverage. The "universal" has to remain the cornerstone of a "transitional" medical care program. Needless to say, things are a bit tricky out there, with US capitalism having practiced disaggregation alongside and coincident with accumulation, fragmenting and dispersing the working class, asset stripping production units, replacing organized workers with non-unionized, and with the increasing casualization of the work force-- temporary workers, contract workers, free lancers etc., and the underlying chronic un and underemployment. The struggle for universal healthcare requires a lot of tactical adjustments-- like for one thing-- removing discretionary control of Medicare funds from state governments and allowing public health professional to create consistent standards; expansion of the community clinic program with health care professionals provide the service area population with updates as to trends in disease, mortality, and current treatments, a method, way, to consistently deliver quality healthcare to an actively involved population. ----- Original Message ----- From: <sobuadha...@hushmail.com> <sartes...@earthlink.net> > > My question is how then to understand the "transitional" > demand. How does it relate to the old division between the > "minimum program" (the demand for immediate reforms) and the > "maximum program" (the goals of a revolutionary state)? > Take heath care for example. Would support for the current > DP health care proposal be a class collaborationist betrayal > because its passage would strengthen the Democratic Party > and the prestige of Obama? Would that also be true even > if this were a decent health care reform instead of the > current mish mash of federal subsidies to the insurance > industry? > > Given the political realities of the US, does a single > payer health care plan become a transitional demand that > sounds like a reform but is in fact only raised to show > that it is unobtainable without revolution? ________________________________________________ Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
