[Marxism] NY TIMES: Obama Wins Election

[S. Artesian]

Perhaps Walter should go back and reread his own posts.  He derides those 
who don't join in the the singing of the "national anthem" written by former 
leader of the NAACP, staunch opponent of racism, discrimination, and 
lynching, but also an emissary of Teddy Roosevelt, as suffering from "racial 
blindness"  (read racism).

He chastizes "so-called Marxists" who miss the meaning of this "historic 
election."   He states "White is no longer the limit of, nor the definition 
of, what can be accomplished in this increasingly multu-colored country. 
All good."

Sue me, but I think that is pretty close to pronouncing racism dead, drowned 
in the flood of votes for Obama.

Walter states that even McCain is more perspicacious than the "so-called 
Marxists" in his grasp of the "political moment."  Really?  And what is that 
political significance.  Well Walter tells us earlier the signifcance 
resides in that the election "changes some of the ideological terrain."

Let's deal with this.  First and foremost, the emotional, visceral impact of 
the election of Barack Obama on African-Americans cannot be overestimated. 
The pride, and increased self-esteem, is visible, actual, concrete.

Secondly, we have certainly had a lot of things of  "truly historical 
signifance" occur in the last ten years.

We had the geological pit and pendulum of "peak oil," signifying an end to 
not capitalism, but "advanced" "civilization"  as we know it.
We had the ascendancy of the euro/decline of the dollar, meaning the 
collapse of US hegemony, and the beginning of the long slide of the US from 
its place at the top of the heap.
We had "decoupling" of China, Brazil, India, Russia...etc. etc. meaning even 
more of the US slide.
We had China-- that was even touted to be the dawn of a new era-- China as 
the big engine that could, that would replace the US.  And how did we know 
this?  Because of all the US debt instruments China holds (which doesn't 
exactly mesh with decoupling, but hey details are for the small-minded).

And what has been the actual concrete impact of these things?  The 
"ideological terrain" has been changed?  Absolutely.  And has that 
ideological change facilitated?  1. Increased profits for the oil 
bourgeoisie.  2. Increased US capital equipment exports to Europe.  3. 
Greater, not lesser dependence of China, Brazil, India, Russia on 
international capital flows, world market commodity prices,  and investment 
inputs in an attempt to "outrun" the social impacts of uneven development, 
and reduced and declining agricultural productivity.  4.  And we have China, 
intimately linked with the US,  dependent on the US and  EU markets, with 
its dollar denominated holdings existing as an index of dependency not 
independence.

All these other "historic events" have served to what?  Change anything? 
Provide an ideological alternative while leaving the mechanisms of 
accumulation not just untouched, but reconstituted?  Exactly.

No doubt there is and great pride and joy (Marvin Gaye, Motown Records 1963) 
in the election of Obama.  But in changing the ideological terrain, all it 
does is reconstitute the mechanisms of accumulation.

I make no apologies for not lifting my voice and singing to that.


- Original Message ----- 
From: "Walter Lippmann" <walterlx at earthlink.net>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>

> Has someone on Marxmail suggested that the class contradictions of
> this society have somehow been reduced, or maybe eliminated?
>
> I guess I missed those posts.