[Marxism] Stan Goff, Bill Fletcher and the 2-party system

[Marvin Gandall]

Joaquin Bustelo wrote:

"...thinking that somehow you're going to stop or reverse the
overall drift of U.S. politics and policy by backing either faction of the
two-party system is naive...The only argument I see for considering a
Democrat victory beneficial is
Stan Goff's, that it will allow a fuller flowering of the disarray in ruling
class political circles..."
============================
But isn't Goff's point precisely that backing one of the factions of the
two-party system will lead to more disarray in ruling class circles which
will stop or reverse the overall drift of US policy? What other reason does
he give for supporting the Democrats?

Actually, while I applaud Goff's step, I wouldn't be as confident about the
outcome which he uses to justify it. I think rather than promoting further
disarray, there is a feeling at the top that the fissures which exist now
need repair, and that there are important problems to solve on a bipartisan
basis, and that Democratic control of the House could accomplish both
objectives.

For example, on Iraq, there seems to be a strong consensus, as there was
over Vietnam after 1969, on the need to begin a staged withdrawal of US
occupation forces while supporting whatever client government can be kept
together with military supplies and US air power and special forces. The
Repulicans have every interest in sharing what will appear to be a
humiliating defeat with the Democrats, under cover of the bipartisan Baker
report.

Similarly, Wall Street - now directly represented in the administration by
the powerful new Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson - believes not without
reason that the Democratic House leadership will feel some "responsibility"
to "address" the fabricated shortfalls in the social security and medicare
accounts, making rollbacks in these areas more possible than if the DP were
playing to the gallery in opposition.

I do think a DP victory would awaken hopes for change in the population,
especially in the cities - and perhaps give a filip to the mass movements -
but I don't think the ruling class feels very threatened by that right now,
and won't, barring an economic collapse.

What may be happening is that whatever dissent exists in the US over the war
and other issues is mostly flowing through the Democratic party -and
increasingly seems to be finding expression also against the leadership
inside that party - and the pressure is being felt on that part of the left
which is most closely tied to the mass movements. We can continue to debate
about whether that's a good thing or a bad thing.