Beware of what you wish for
The Democrats must be rubbing their hands in glee these days, in the run up to the election. Yesterday's New York Times reported, for example, that polling data in "the bellweather state of Ohio" shows that the Republican party is in trouble there. Some are suggesting that this election might be the Democratic Party's equivalent to what happened in 1994, when Republicans took over the reins of Congressional power from the Democrats.
If the Democrats win control of Congress this year, it will not be because they have offered any kind of positive alternative to the Republicans. On the contrary, their deliberate ambiguity on Iraq, their lack of interest in proposing social legislation, and their general support of ruling class interests suggests that there will be little real change. Swing and independent voters seem to be turning to the Democrats out of disgust with the status quo, not out of any positive and principled program that the Democrats might be offering as an alternative.
On the other hand, it could be argued that US elections often have little to do with ideology anyway. Given the tweedledee-tweedledum nature of the two ruling factions of the American ruling class, when an opposition party sweeps the ruling party out of power, it has more to do with the inevitable pendulum swings of voter dissatisfaction with how those in power have squandered the promised opportunities afforded to them, than it does with any ideological shift. Those promised opportunities inevitably end in disappointment, and the voters swing back and forth between one failed party and another. This is the reality of American politics under the current duopoly of corporate-sponsored political parties.
It is easy, when the Democrats are out of power, to acquire this glow of support, but once they acquire power, they will suddenly be held accountable for what they do. Given the lack of ideological coherence on their part, the honeymoon will probably be short. The worst thing that could happen to the Democrats is the acquisition of a majority in the Congress. That glow that they've acquired from being powerless will quickly fade, and reality will set in.
It is interesting to see what has happened to the Republicans, after nearly six years in power. Even their evangelical supporters have become disillusioned. David Kuo, who was involved with Bush's "faith based initiatives" for a time, has now written a book titled Tempting Faith (great title, by the way), in which he reports that the Bush regime essentially used evangelicals for political gain. To which I say--duh. Bush's base of support, which includes his hard core constituency on the religious right, is starting to crumble.
The San Francisco Bay Guardian, which fancies itself as "progressive" but often endorses Democrats (although this year they have endorsed some Green candidates as well), interviewed Lewis Lapham in last week's issue. When asking him about a hypothetical Bush impeachment and an imagined ascent by Pelosi into the White House, Lapham responded,
If the Democrats win control of Congress this year, it will not be because they have offered any kind of positive alternative to the Republicans. On the contrary, their deliberate ambiguity on Iraq, their lack of interest in proposing social legislation, and their general support of ruling class interests suggests that there will be little real change. Swing and independent voters seem to be turning to the Democrats out of disgust with the status quo, not out of any positive and principled program that the Democrats might be offering as an alternative.
On the other hand, it could be argued that US elections often have little to do with ideology anyway. Given the tweedledee-tweedledum nature of the two ruling factions of the American ruling class, when an opposition party sweeps the ruling party out of power, it has more to do with the inevitable pendulum swings of voter dissatisfaction with how those in power have squandered the promised opportunities afforded to them, than it does with any ideological shift. Those promised opportunities inevitably end in disappointment, and the voters swing back and forth between one failed party and another. This is the reality of American politics under the current duopoly of corporate-sponsored political parties.
It is easy, when the Democrats are out of power, to acquire this glow of support, but once they acquire power, they will suddenly be held accountable for what they do. Given the lack of ideological coherence on their part, the honeymoon will probably be short. The worst thing that could happen to the Democrats is the acquisition of a majority in the Congress. That glow that they've acquired from being powerless will quickly fade, and reality will set in.
It is interesting to see what has happened to the Republicans, after nearly six years in power. Even their evangelical supporters have become disillusioned. David Kuo, who was involved with Bush's "faith based initiatives" for a time, has now written a book titled Tempting Faith (great title, by the way), in which he reports that the Bush regime essentially used evangelicals for political gain. To which I say--duh. Bush's base of support, which includes his hard core constituency on the religious right, is starting to crumble.
The San Francisco Bay Guardian, which fancies itself as "progressive" but often endorses Democrats (although this year they have endorsed some Green candidates as well), interviewed Lewis Lapham in last week's issue. When asking him about a hypothetical Bush impeachment and an imagined ascent by Pelosi into the White House, Lapham responded,
Well, that wouldn't happen. I would not like to see Nancy Pelosi in the White House, if you're asking me that question, because I don't think her policies would be that much different from — I don't think they'd be extreme as Bush — but I don't think she has at heart the interests of the American people, if that's what you mean. She's a servant of the [ruling class] interests, as is [Sen. Dianne] Feinstein.Bravo, Mr. Lapham. That is the reality of American politics. And the sooner progressives come to realize this, the better off they will be.
You are saying the same thing, I've been telling people for years. The Democrats are actually the main obstacle to social change.
Posted by
Frank Partisan |
4:42 PM
I was thinking just this morning that Rush Limbaugh and his cronies are likely praying the Democrats take back Congress. That would give Rush & co. job security for years.
Posted by
Anonymous |
12:11 PM
Post a Comment