[Marxism] The shifting ruling class mainstream

[Joaquin Bustelo]

Dayne Goodwin: "i do notice that there's nothing more in Joaquin's latest
epistle about the Obama campaign being a continuation of the 'most powerful
social movement by any sector of working and oppressed people in this
country' in modern U.S. history.  Can we cross that illusion off the list?" 

The reason there is nothing on there about that is, first, that the Obama
campaign *ended* a month ago. Didn't you notice? He won.

Second, that the subject I was addressing in the post was not Obama's
campaign at all, but rather the (to me) very evident shift in the stance of
"mainstream" bourgeois policy.

But third, this trick of pulling quotations out of context and framing "when
did you stop beating your wife" questions around them I'm sure served you
well in high school debate club meetings, but is hardly suitable for a
discussion among serious people. 

The ORIGINAL context of the phrase you quote is this. I was replying to a
post that said sure, Obama was preferable to McCain just as Kerry and Gore
to Bush, etc.

And I said no, that's not right, the alignment of social forces around the
various candidacies was very different:

"There is, in U.S. society, a *qualitative* difference between an Obama, on
the one hand, and a Gore, Kerry, Bush, McCain, Dobbs (either Farrell or Lou)
or Timothy McVeigh on the other. It is a difference that has played a
central role in the development of the U.S. social formation. It is a
difference that led to one of the bloodiest and most significant civil wars
in world history. It is a difference that led to the most powerful social
movement by any sector of working and oppressed people in this country of
the modern, post-WWII epoch.

"Insofar as that difference is concerned, Obama's candidacy was a result of
the conquests of that movement. But it was more --it was perceived and
embraced by the overwhelming, crushing majority of the protagonists of that
movement, the Black community, as an expression of and part of the
movement."

To which you countered with the simple minded counterposition:

"Was the Obama presidential election campaign a *continuation* of the 'most
powerful social movement by any sector of working and oppressed people in
this country' in modern U.S. history? - as Joaquin argues.

"Or was the Obama presidential election campaign a successful effort by one
of the smartest, most talented, most ambitious and audacious individual
bourgeois politicians in modern U.S. history.  Could it be that the Obama
candidacy was particularly useful for the capitalist system at a time of
severe and deepening crisis?" 

In responded that "I think the answers to Dayne's first AND second question
are clearly YES," rejecting the contrived counterposition.

You didn't choose to debate that then, but instead come back NOW, a couple
of weeks later, and in response to a post about a distinctly different
albeit related matter, you impute to me a shame-faced retreat from what I
said.

You are, of course, free to believe the earth is flat, Mary was a virgin,
and God planted dinosaur bones in the ground as a test to separate those
faithful to the literal truth of the Bible from the infidels.

You are also free to believe that the movement of Blacks as a people was
neither the most powerful social movement of modern U.S. history nor did it
have anything to do with the Obama campaign.

But it is simply silly, among serious people, to dismiss as an "illusion"
that the PROTAGONISTS of the Black movement, Black people, viewed and
embraced his campaign as an expression and part of that movement, and viewed
his victory as not just the victory of an individual person, but as a
victory of Black folks and their struggle for liberation.

THOSE ARE FACTS, not illusions. 

You can argue, if you want, that the Black community is entirely wrong, that
there is no sense in which this was a victory for Black rights and whatever
other sectarian foibles you had in mind when you framed your post. But at
least give reality its due. And also give the sophomoric debating tricks a
miss.

Joaquin