Tue Jun 19, 2012, 06:35 PM
kpete (44,714 posts)
To vote for a Republican means, now, to vote for a plutocracy
The Curse of Political Purity
To vote for a Republican means, now, to vote for a plutocracy that depends for its support on anti-government forces like the tea party, Southern racists, religious fanatics, and war investors in the military-industrial complex. It does no good to say that “Romney is a good man, not a racist.” That may be true, but he needs a racist South as part of his essential support. And the price they will demand of him comes down to things like Supreme Court appointments. (The Republicans have been more realistic than the Democrats in seeing that presidential elections are really for control of the courts.)
The independents, too ignorant or inexperienced to recognize these basic facts, are the people most susceptible to lying flattery. They are called the good folk too inner-directed to follow a party line or run with the herd. They are like the idealistic imperialists “with clean hands” in Graham Greene’s The Quiet American—they should wear leper bells to warn people of their vicinity.
The etherialists who are too good to stoop toward the “lesser evil” of politics—as if there were ever anything better than the lesser evil there—naively assume that if they just bring down the current system, or one part of it that has disappointed them, they can build a new and better thing of beauty out of the ruins. Of course they never get the tabula rasa on which to draw their ideal schemes. What they normally do is damage the party closest to their professed ideals. Third parties are run by people who make the best the enemy of their own good and bring down that good. Theodore Roosevelt’s’ Bull Moose variant of his own Republican Party drained enough Republican votes to let the Democrat, Woodrow Wilson, win. (His voters, believing he would not “send our boys to war,” saw the prince become a frog in World War I.) George H. W. Bush rightly believes he was sabotaged by the crypto-Republican Ross Perot, who helped Bill Clinton win. Ralph Nader siphoned crucial votes from Al Gore to give us George W. Bush.
All these brave “independents” say that there is not a dime’s worth of difference between the two parties, and claim they can start history over, with candidates suddenly become as good as they are themselves. What they do is give us the worst of evils. If Professor Unger gets his way, and destroys President Obama, he will give us a Romney deeply in political debt to the party he slimily wooed all through the primaries. He will be in a position to turn the Supreme Court from a mainly reactionary body to an almost entirely reactionary one.
2 replies, 771 views
Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
To vote for a Republican means, now, to vote for a plutocracy (Original post)
Response to kpete (Original post)
Tue Jun 19, 2012, 06:52 PM
upaloopa (5,497 posts)
1. Not voting or voting for a third party has consequences just as voting for one of the two major
In effect, there is no such thing as remaining above the fray, staying pure etc.
Response to kpete (Original post)
Tue Jun 19, 2012, 07:00 PM
MisterP (15,223 posts)
2. somehow I missed Wills's list of the relentless, unflagging, courageous party opposition to
neoliberalism, bankrupting wars, Big Insurance, Big Banks, Big Pharma, gutting SS and Medicare, and the National Security State, and letting war criminals walk
because that would be necessary for the thesis that "the American people have failed their politicians"; also he'd need ironclad proof that totally absolved Katherine Harris for 2000