4) is really the outside/inside, inside/outside strategy in which elements outside of the Democratic party amass enough power to draw people to them, and elements inside gain leverage as their threat of exiting become more credible. I agree with Julio: either way, this strategy produces a gravitational pull to the left.
Joel Blau Original Message: ----------------- From: Julio Huato [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sat, 11 Feb 2006 18:13:16 -0500 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: The 2-party system Jim, > There are three main strategies > > 1) support the Democratic candidate, whoever she or he may be. > > 2) support some "third" party candidate on the political left. > > 3) eschew electoral politics (at least at the national level) because > the system is totally biased against any change. (that's my position, > as can be seen from the biased way I presented it.) There's a fourth strategy: 4) agitate, propagandize, unite, organize broader forces in favor of foreign policy reform and economic security for working people. Changes in FP and ES will have the largest impact on the lives of working people (here and abroad) and those changes are feasible under likely scenarios in the future political dynamics. Sure, there will be fluctuations in the public mood re. Iraq, but time is not on the side of the occupiers. So we have to keep working on that. We also have to work on preventing an attack on Iran. And we need effective propaganda about the need to shift the priorities of U.S. foreign policy from advancing special interests to peace through cooperation and development. As far as economic security, people are concerned about it and there's momentum for universal health care. Excluding the ostrich's approach, we cannot get around the Democratic Party by merely wishing it away. I made this case in http://www.swans.com/library/art11/jhuato01.html and my argument is absolutely irrefutable. I'd add now that today the DP is *much more* vulnerable to a clever attack from the left flank than it was 2 years ago. But, to have a fighting chance, such attack requires significant unity of the left inside and outside the DP. Without this unity, it's pie in the sky. And this unity will be hard, because there's mutual distrust between the two crowds -- and for good reason. But that can be overcome. I may be overly optimistic here, but I feel that if the left works hard and smart on agitation, propaganda, *unity*, and organization in the coming years, then as the primaries approach it'll be in some position to either impose an anti-war candidate or break up with the DP and launch a credible third-party campaign. By itself, the left inside the DP (e.g., the unions, the leadership of UFPJ, etc.) will lean towards (1) above. Under their circumstances, they feel they have more to lose. So they lean towards excessive caution. On the other hand, the left outside the DP (e.g., small radical political formations, the youth with leftist inclinations, Jim Devine, Louis Proyect, Julio Huato, etc.) will split into (1), (2), and (3) with little consequence. And the cycle will repeat itself. By joining forces around FP reform and ES for workers, the two lefts can change the political balance. Completely. And, IMO, it's all within reach. > I agree with Louis that this is a better time to talk about electoral > strategy than during the 2008 Presidential election season itself, > when emotions are likely to run high. Did Louis say that? If he did, I take my irony back. Julio -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ .
