Monday, October 27, 2003

The 'Biblical Stupidity of the Left'

Readers Respond to the Saga of the Tough-Minded Liberal

"I blame Ralph Nader for the 339 Americans who died in Iraq and the countless tens of thousands of Iraqis. His arrogance and fake purity gave Bush Florida."
— Anonymous reply to The Dirty War of the Tough-Minded Liberals

The mindset of the angry Democrat that authored the twaddle above is borne from the same kind of logic that allows millions of Americans to think that Saddam Hussein had something to do with 9/11. People have different ways of coping with adversity. Bush’s ascendancy to the presidency in January 2001 greatly enraged many Americans, including millions of true believers in the Democratic Party. They needed a scapegoat for the failure of their political party to defeat the conniving Republicans in the 2000 tug-of-war for the presidency. Instead of recognizing the faults of their flock’s leader, they opted to cast an accusatory eye toward outsiders who had politely declined to run in their political circles.

Why not focus on the true perpetrators of the Iraq atrocities? There are plenty of guilty parties walking the streets of official Washington, undeterred by their heinous actions. All of the officials involved in developing and implementing the Bush administration’s foreign policy certainly are more at fault for the killings in Iraq than private citizen Ralph Nader. Why not focus on the Democrats in Congress, including the 29 Democrats in the Senate — particularly party leader Tom Daschle and presidential candidates John Kerry and John Edwards —who voted on Oct. 11, 2002 to give President Bush a green light to invade Iraq? Where’s the anger for the 82 Democrats in the House, including presidential candidate and then-House Minority Leader Richard Gephardt, who also voted for the Iraq war resolution?

Throughout U.S. history, groups of Americans are notorious for blaming minorities for their sorry lot in life. Hardship and tragedy often has bred ill-mannered behavior toward those people perceived as outsiders. In some instances, the battered minority has eventually moved up in social standing to a level where it can acquire immunity from the insults of the majority. In the case of the U.S. political system, the movement of the political minority to gain acceptance remains a work in progress. The key word here, though, is progress. Despite the major media blackout, there continues to be progress made toward breaking the monopoly on power held by the dominant political parties.

While there are plenty of Americans who still blame Nader’s 2000 campaign for paving the way for George W. Bush to move into the White House, a growing number in our society is recognizing that the foundation on which the U.S. empire rests will remain intact for as long as we continue to blindly follow the dictates of the entrenched powers in Washington that manage it.

I was pleasantly surprised to find that the one person’s sentiment on Nader was not shared by the majority of people who responded to my essay, “The Dirty War of the Tough-Minded Liberals,” which ran in both CounterPunch and Press Action. Most agreed with my premise that the Democrats are not offering a clear alternative to the Republicans on foreign policy issues. One reader, however, highlighted my attempt at an awkward analogy in the essay, while others took issue with what they thought were unfair generalizations. But all of the responses, even the feedback from the Nader-hater, were impassioned thoughts on an issue that will divide us for years to come.

Here are many of the comments that I received in response to the essay. — Mark Hand

My political views are probably closer to yours than Al Gores, but I am continually amazed at the almost biblical stupidity of the left in this country. If you honestly believe that all that has happened to our civil liberties and our completely unnecessary war in Iraq would have happened even if Gore had won, then you are truly an idiot. One of the reasons the country keeps moving to the right is that the GOP wins so many elections. Every time the GOP wins it pulls the dems and the whole political spectrum to the right. The far right understands this and sucks it up and supports leader like Papa Bush, who they hated, because they understand that even a wimpy conservative will pull the country farther to the right.

The left cannot show such maturity. No, they must prance around bemoaning every policy that isn’t “comprehensive” and reeking of big government. In close elections they (the ultra left) in their galactic stupidity have handed the GOP and conservatives victory after victory. I think people like you and Nader are afraid that moderate liberal leaders may actually be able to improve the lives of everyday people. Almost everyone I know, which are mostly middle class to lower class, improved their lot during the Clinton administration. But did people like you give him any credit. This allows fox news to balance its talk shows with a leftist who hates Clinton (like Christopher Hitchens) with a conservative who hates him, thus shifting the whole political frame to the right. I blame Ralph Nader for the 339 Americans who died in Iraq and the countless tens of thousands of Iraqis. His arrogance and fake purity gave Bush Florida. Clinton created millions of jobs. Did Nader ever create a job for anyone? Except for George W. Bush.

Anonymous

I found it hard to find anything positive in your article, since you seem to say a pox on both your houses. In the very limited world of a progressive liberal I find myself, you’re right, the Dennis Kucinich candidacy is the one which to me which makes the most real sense. However, with the realism of how much one can realistically expect the voters to understand and actually vote for, I am also of the opinion that I must support whichever candidate is put forward by the Democratic party in ‘04. Nader was entitled to run in ‘00, but he had to know that at the end of the day he would in effect be contributing to a Bush win. For that, I fault him. Please, let’s not keep on quibbling about all this, since the Bush Administration has to be replaced, surely you can see that. Four more years of this disaster appears to be the complete end of the US as I used to know it.

Jean M.
Hampton Bays, N.Y.

While I agree with much of what you have to say about the spinelessness of the Democrats in general, as well as the sordidness of politics across the two-party system, I think that you are quite wrong about 9/11. If Al Gore had not been ripped off by the Right, those towers would still be standing. The attacks might well have gone on, but Gore would not have ordered the Air Force and Norad to stand down, and the death toll would have been one-tenth of what it turned out to be. Bush and his handlers must be defeated, even if by a Clark, or even Leiberman, just to give the forces of balance someplace on which to stand, and take our country back, including the repeal of the patriot act and tax cuts for the rich and corporations. Nader is a fool if he thinks that siphoning votes from the Dems is going to do anything but accelerate the theft of America and its values from her citizenry, although a good point can be made for the idea that a citizenry as irresponsible as this one gets what it deserves. I only disagree with that point because the right has organized itself into such a hateful, greedy, corrupt, sneaky, lying machine that ordinary Americans have been denied the information they need to purge these hypocrites from public life. And the further behind we fall, the harder it will be to recover.

Ron M.
Mystic, Conn.

Nice piece.

But the arguemnt for all those who are anti-Iraq war may be simpler. The Republicans say that the invasion of Iraq was right, AND now we must stay the course. All the Dems say that the invasion of Iraq was wrong (Lieberman excepted) though they voted for it, BUT now we must stay the course. So for us the only choice will be the Greens. I also note that Tomasky like all the rest is arguing strongly for Israel’s interests. How can a liberal be for an apertheid state? And let us face facts, the war on Iraq is only secondarily about oil. It is primarily the project of the right-wing Zionists in and out of the administration. U.S. policy on the Middle East must cease being made in Tel Aviv, no less than US policy on Cuba and Central America must cease being made in Miami. I hope the Greens are a bit more stalwart than they have been in their stance against Israel and the Israeli lobby here. This is not anti-Semitic by any stretch of the imagination no more than opposing apartheid was anti-White.

John W.
Worcester, Mass.

Dear Mark,

As a former Republican who is a hybrid kind of fish, I see both parties as hydra-like heads on a single monstrous body . I’m not a politician and i wasn’t interested in politics before. Now, as one who has “seen the light” as it were, It has become my consuming interest. I’m not a liberal although on some things I might be called one, and I’m conservative in that I want the constitution reinstated as the law of the land and a sound fiscal policy, and I’m a humanitarian because i believe Iraqi lives are just as precious to them as our lives are to us and there has to be a better way. How do you battle terror which is first an idea backed up by action when guns and bombs can’t destroy an idea ? As for me, the brand of democracy our administration is rhetorically trying to export is not something I want my name attached to. I’m proud of our young people in the military who have been exploited and lives taken for what? Let’s throw all of them out--legislative, executive and judicial in one clean sweep and put people in office who aren’t lawyers but men and women of integrity who aren’t beholden to Israel or big corporations. I want my country back! Rantings from an 81 year old woman. Thank you.

Anonymous

Thanks Mark, great piece. Don’t we just sound like my ancient Aryan-Greek cousins? Selling each other this way, then that way, carving pieces here, coveting pieces over there — all the while conspiring for another war, and another war, and another. ####’em.

40% of the people are registered to vote. The majority knows that their interests will never be served in a country run for the exclusive benefit of the Few. Democracy. Sure it is. Like ancient Greece, for the Few.

I have watched the Democratic animals in their circus performances for 40 years. They stood by and watched the Roosevelt dream of the Four Freedoms turned into total shit and then flushed down the same oubliette (place of forgetting) where we sent the Indians. If you took all of the Dems out and shot them tomorrow, by nightfall, each of their places would be taken by an equally squalid slug — looking for a deal.

That’s alright. This diseased animal called America is running on a very short fuse. Downturn becomes Recession becomes Depression becomes Collapse. You see, the billionairefilth who own our single party system, have gutted this country. It is now a husk waiting for the first harsh wind to blow it away.

As a side note, check out what the bastards have done on the pension plans — talk about dirty bombs. All those people with 401k plans, think they have all this stuff — and they have nothing. Won’t that be a shock. All those arrogant sons-a-bitches who sneered as the blue-collar middle class died — will have the shirts on their back and nothing else. Gosh. Just another market adjustment, I suppose. My America.

So, by all means, lets have an argument about TMLs vs Chomsky & Vidal. Great theater. And let’s have a really “issues driven” campaign instead of rigged voting, personal smears, and negative campaigns. It’ll be a good thing. Build it and they will come. A penny saved. A stich in time. I just love platitudes. So many have died for them.

Thanks, see you when Chase closes its doors. Yeah, that big.

Timothy D.

Very simply, these two men are loathed predominantly by Jewish Liberals because they are pro-Palestinian. There is little else for an honest person to wonder about.

M. Johnson
Hawaii

Sir,

I liked your piece in Counterpunch. I was getting near the end of it and starting to get anxious, because I was looking for that conclusive reference to Kucinich, as representing the one candidate who can appeal to Greens, Libertarians and a wide range of so-labeled Democrats. I fear that your assertion, by way of Tomasky that Kucinich can be easily neutralized is an accurate one. I am writing to encourage you to help make sure that doesn’t happen. Keep mentioning Kucinich. Use your voice to educate and inspire others. Kucinich represents a good chance to steer the Democratic party back into something of a two party system again by uniting the progressive opposition, which until now has been hopelessly fragmented, and bringing the political left its first victory in memory.

From that, I can eventually see the emergence, not of fringe parties on the Left, but fringe parties out of the middle. Dregs of the Democrats and Republicans. The ‘tough-minded’ Corporatists who can’t get around the essential differences of left and right and believe that through Imperial Commerce it can be both ways at once.

Thanks once again for your interesting article, and please do what you can to get the message of Dennis Kucinich out to the American people.

Jeff M.

Hi,

I’m a dissatisfied conservative — a traditional isolationist who was taught to mind my own business. The Democrats have already made several overtures to a few of us rebels — but there is no way I will ever join their party. I voted for Nader as a protest vote, and have been outspoken against both Dean and Clark — they may indeed be the ‘lesser of two evils’ — but they are still hell-bent on empire and world domination, as you note. I know some traditional conservatives plan to sit this one out — I’m still undecided. There doesn’t seem to be a place for us at the table — although I respect Kucinich’s stance, he doesn’t even blip on the radar screen. I still consider him the best of the lot — there are a lot of ignorant snobs on the DFL side, and a couple lunatics nearly as bad as GWB. Seems there hasn’t been a decent candidate since — gee, I can’t remember when. I guess Eisenhower was the best of the lot, in spite of all his warts.

Why doesn’t somebody like Byrd run? He’s been outspoken, as has Kennedy of late, although I prefer Ron Paul. I’m sure there’s a lot of decent people that will run once this country is back on the ‘right’ track - but we’d get there faster if they’d run now ... quite a dilemma. Our electoral college system is a failure — that needs to be reformed, as does gerrymandering. I think those issues are more important than campaign finance reform - money wouldn’t mean as much if we had a better election system. I like parliamentary governments better - but I’m biased by my European heritage. (I’m first-born American)

This empire-building military BS is going to bankrupt this country — actually, we’re already bankrupt — it’s just fancy dancing with financing that’s keeping us solvent — the rest of the world is propping up our economy so we don’t take them all down in the inevitable collapse. Dollar hegemony is now a joke.

I think we need to hear a little more about just what these DFL candidates want to do — they do indeed seem to have the same goals, just different excuses. After all, Clinton could have lifted the Iraq sanctions and stopped the bombing — instead he escalated and bombed even more countries. I didn’t see him as any great progressive — just another ‘lesser evil’ — that won’t wash anymore. Time to get rid of all the bums and start over.

Great article — really emphasized the hypocrisy.

Best Regards,

Sandy L.
Menomonie, Wis.

Thanks for your contribution in ‘Counterpunch’. I thought I may have been caught in some kind of time warp when I still to this day get sick at the sight of pictures of Hubert Humphrey, Dean Rusk and especially MacNamera as the enemy that were scheming to steal my youth by sending me to Viet Nam and that was when when I was a mere 13 years old. As a child they were no different to me as to the ones they morphed into as Agnew, Laird and Kissinger. I argued with my left-wing friends that supporting Gore was simply a vote for complacency to no avail. The reactionary policies of the DLC would make Nixon blush. At this point in life I have been playing with the idea that organized abstentionism may be the only way to relate to the majority of people since indeed that is where at least 50% of the population tends to react to the fraudulent voting system. Perhaps the anarchists have a point? Can’t really say but watching former leftists like Gitlin and Hitchens take the hike to neo-liberal imperialist apologetics and Michael Moore applaud some trigger happy General certainly has tempered my interest in electoral politics. For what it is worth, thanks for the reality check by calling another caste of the elites to task for suggesting a new lease on life for another century of imperialist adventures.

With clenched fist raised high,

Tom S.

Mark:

Great article today! You basically hit the nail on the head — the far left is too enamored with logic and humanism to great elected. Thus, we should all give in and join the world-saving Demmies! Yaaaay! Give me a break. Besides being radical is funner than being a centrist. When I was in junior high, weren’t the centrists known as “squares?” I’d rather be rad.

Anyway, keep up the great writing. I really enjoy your style. I just found you site (via Counterpunch) and I’m going to go back and read some of your archives.

Peace,

Kyle

Regarding Wiesely Clark:

“Calling a general ‘anti-war’ is like calling Ronald McDonald ‘anti-hamburger’ — he may not eat the Happy Meals but he sure as hell has his face plastered on the box.”

Good stuff, Mark Hand. These so-called Democrats are going to try to eat what’s left of the left for breakfast, and all too many of us are sitting around and encouraging them. This was never so clear as it was in the level of calumny that came in the immediate weeks following the election of 2000 directed toward Nader voters. That was the first time I got that feeling we might get served up to the reaction the way Ebert served up Luxemburg and Liebnecht. The only awkward part of your allegory I see is that there is no social democratic or laborite threat in the United States just yet, most of the time the enemy know they can depend on us to just fizzle off into the confusion the Greens are currently struggling with.

The worst thing now is that many of the Greens can’t decide whether they want to put together an independent organization or try to push the Democrats to the left. As someone who watched both the McGovern insurgency and the Rainbow coalition get coopted where they weren’t effectively shoved aside, I have no confidence whatsoever in such a strategy, be it led by Kucinich or whomever. There is no point in supporting an independent movement that isn’t sure it wants to do the hard work of creating an independent political movement. IN the end, Kucinich will ask us to vote for Wesley Clark, or some other tough minded liberals.

We need some tough-minded radical labor organizers who want to fight for the independent mass movement of the working class. Until we do see same, I’ll just keep leafleting for the only people who recognize this needful struggle, and the reality is the only folks who see it are marxists. I’m not wasting another moment of my life working for liberals who’ll just cut my throat when the next hard wave of reaction kicks in. They’ve had all this time to oppose the bush bastard, they’ve done squat. It’s time to get serious about how we can make our move on behalf of the working class. The enemy never loses sight of how they can make their moves on us, na?

M. H.P.
Seattle

Dear Mark Hand,

I liked your essay and agree with its central point — that bombing people into submission to the US government is no more defensible when justified by liberal human rights rhetoric than by neo-conservative blather.

I suggest taking a bit more care, however, in lumping people into the category of bellicose militarists. My impression is that for several years, at least, Bill Moyers has been busting these militarist imperialists (in liberal as well neo-con dressings) with pretty good, honest journalism.

Unless I am mistaken, he might be the only nationally broadcast tv journalist who is actually doing his job on this, and I think that earns him an honorable mention.

Best Regards,

Randy B.

Mark Hand,

Great article by you which appeared in Counterpunch today. Your website also looks great. I am excited that you and/or this website is Arlington-based. Between that and the fact that Thomas Frank, the Baffler editor, has moved here, the D.C. area suddenly becomes really interesting for left politics and thought. Up till now I have had trouble finding people around here worth talking to.

Dennis H.

Comments (0)

Printer Friendly Format | Tell-a-Friend

Next: An Overdose of Clintonian Foreign Policy? -->

<-- Previous: In Appreciation of the 2003 New York Yankees

Support Press Action