Ajit, I think you missed at least my point: The Socialists get elected, and they perform far below expectations (but yes some people are concretely aided), that sets up a reaction which (given the dominant parties) is to the right and more right than before the first Mitterand election. In the United States, Richard Nixon was more left than Clinton is today. Why? Because Nixon had more left pressure, Carter was a disappointment, which led to Reagan/Bush who shifted to right and led to disappointment, which led to Clinton, etc. In my own state of New York, we are in the "right" phase, with disappointment over Democratic Governor Cuomo leading to Republican Governor Pataki, more right than Governor Rockefellar. In Ontario, Canada, disappointment over the NDP led to overwhelming victory of the current right-wing administration, the most right-wing in recent memory. In other words, we need to take a long view of politics, see the trends, fight against the current (the current is almost always against the workers), while recognizing the type of point you are making. There is an element of good cop--bad cop going on you seem to miss. The signal about the UK/French elections is to analyze what opportunites are being opened up for genuine working class politics. Paul ************************************************************************* Paul Zarembka, supporting the RESEARCH IN POLITICAL ECONOMY Web site at http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/PZarembka, and using OS/2 Warp. ************************************************************************* On Thu, 5 Jun 1997, Ajit Sinha wrote: > At 07:40 AM 6/5/97 -0700, you wrote: > >Michael, > > > >I remember the first Mitterand/Socialist victory and the cheering in the > >streets. We all know now what followed! > > > >I think your point is a very valuable everywhere, including in the United > >States when people think voting Democratic is progressive. > > > >Paul > ______________ > > But Paul and Michael, I think such political changes do make inormous > difference in many people's life. For example, in France there is a good > chance that the so-called "people without papers" will be able to stay and > not deported. Moreover, the change in the citizenship law may also be > reverted. Another example from Australia: here after the Liberals (which > means conservatives in Australia) won a land slide victory, the whole > environment has significantly changed against the migrants and > minorities--you can experience it everyday in the streets. Now it has become > almost impossible for a migrant worker to bring his or her family. Even > Australian citizens marrying foreigners are simply unable to be united with > their wifes or husbands. The case of the aborigines is, of course, now known > world wide. They have been the biggest losers because of this political > change. I think social politics do matter, and we need to remain conscious > of it all the time. Cheers, ajit sinha > > > >************************************************************************* > >Paul Zarembka, supporting the RESEARCH IN POLITICAL ECONOMY Web site at > >http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/PZarembka, and using OS/2 Warp. > >************************************************************************* > > > > > >On Wed, 4 Jun 1997, Michael Perelman wrote: > > > >> The French elections were a tragedy. From what I understand, the left > >> comes in without a program. Please correct me if I am wrong. They will > >> offer a kindler, gentler neo-liberalism, something like Giscard. The > >> people will become disgusted, giving more credibility to the right. > >> > >> It is sad that we are in such a mess as to look to a disaster in the > >> making like this as a ray of hope. > >> > >> -- > >> Michael Perelman > >> Economics Department > >> California State University > >> Chico, CA 95929 > >> > >> Tel. 916-898-5321 > >> E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> > > > > >
