[Marxism] An analysis of the DP convention that works better

[S. Artesian]

The moderator's identification of TINA is not solely mockery Marvin when you 
state:

"The fact that the liberal bourgeoisie no longer plays a progressive role in 
the broad  historical sense seems to me to be beside the point, which is 
that, in terms of contemporary politics, the liberal DP and SD parties and 
the forces they represent are "all there is" to block the conservative and 
reactionary parties to their right who want to rollback the historical gains 
of the masses and weaken their organizations."

That's quite a statement for any number of reasons-- first, I don't know of 
the liberal bourgeoisie playing a progressive role in the broad historical 
sense ever-- or at least not since the rollback of Reconstruction in the US, 
and if you look at that rollback, it could not have been accomplished 
without that "liberal bourgeoisie" agreeing to, participating in [and even 
before the official withdrawal of troops, the official reinstatement of the 
Southern landowners] the "rollback the historical gains of the masses and 
weaken their organizations."

Secondly, if you look to more recent history you find the SD and Labor 
parties playing just that role you ascribe to the conservatives and 
reactionaries-- do you think for a minute Thatcher's election would have 
been possible if the British LP under Callaghan had not first disorganized 
the rank and file movement that had thrown Heath out of office?   Do you 
think Merkel would have been triumphed if Schroeder had not first put the 
unions' feet to the fire?  Do you think Schroeder could have succeeded if 
the union leaderships  were not committed to, part and parcel of the 
accumulation of capital; if the unions were not incorporated into just that 
accumulation through their ties to the social-democrats?

Thirdly, there is an extreme note of voluntarism in your formulation-- as if 
the election or rather, selection, of the reactionary parties is a voluntary 
act, an exercise of choice, and not in fact dictated by sharpening economic 
distress and conflicts; and those conflicts will somehow be what? 
mitigated? or decided in favor of "the left" by having the proper candidates 
elected to office by the hard work of leftists?

And most of all, I think your above statement is a step back from your 
original position that recognized the DP as "inadequate" but still providing 
an arena for access to forces that would not be inadequate to resolving 
those economic conflicts at the heart of the current and future predicament. 
You really are now say there is no alternative; there can only be reform.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Marvin Gandall" <marvgandall at videotron.ca>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2008 1:35 PM
Subject: Re: [Marxism] An analysis of the DP convention that works better