2016 Election Talk – Already
It was revealed yesterday that Jeb Bush is likely interested in running for President in 2016, in a possible showdown with Hillary Clinton – another Bush vs. Clinton contest – which prompted liberals to begin lecturing us already on how bad he would be for in comparison with Clinton.
I’ve been called stupid and a moron, among other things, for criticizing the Democrats in general and President Obama in particular because to these liberals, my criticism means that I fail to see or admit that they’re different from Republicans, or worse that I’m siding with them.
Obviously, whether or not you see a fundamental and qualitative difference between the two depends on your class perspective and on what you consider to be just or right. If you’re unjustly incarcerated, how much does it matter whether your prison guard addresses you respectfully or talks down on you and treats you with disdain every opportunity he gets? If the question is whether the Republicans are more blatant in their attacks on working people and their unconditional and unbridled defense of the corporations, sure, they are. But, the point that’s hard to deny is that both parties serve the same corporate interests at the expense of the working class. This is corroborated by the corporations which give generously to both parties which then return the favor, in almost the same manner and shape and with same results. Speaking of results, it’s hard to argue against them which show the continued rise and even a sharp upsurge in corporate profits and continued decline in income of the people at the bottom, after over four years of Obama presidency.
The point should not be to identify and back the party that kills us a little more slowly. The point should be to stand and fight for our share and our rights because neither of the two corporate parties will. The Republicans may be louder and more obnoxious, but the Democrats have been quite competent in representing corporations and their billionaire shareholders and pretty effective in imposing austerity on working people, probably even more effective than their Republican counterparts. Measures that Republicans find hard to impose on people, Democrats often step forward to undertake. They’re also good at taking away from people the spirit of resistance and fighting back due to the misplaced trust many people have for them; so, at least in that sense, they end up harming working class interests even more than the Republicans. Now, if you’re doing well and are fine with the status quo, that’s a different story. After all, liberals are mostly intellectuals from middle class and their position is not surprising. But, if you want real social justice and real democracy, then you can’t help but take a position that’s more out of the box of the two corporate parties, and this is what’s hard for liberals to understand.
This phenomenon is nothing new. Every period in history, including slavery, had its own liberals who were okay with the status quo, but did not want excesses and “mistreatment”, as if owning other human beings as your property was not itself mistreatment or injustice enough, worthy of resisting and fighting back. Then, too, they had no fundamental problem with the system, but just certain slave owners and their treatment of slaves and mocked and even hindered the efforts of those who wanted to fight against the system. Only after it was abolished did they come around to support the change. Liberals generally will go along with change, but only after it’s been brought about by others. It’s not hard to follow change; what is hard is to lead for and effect it, as did Dr. King for racial justice and as he was about to do for economic justice when he was assassinated.
Liberals’ political position is reflective of their class standing: what they themselves stand to lose or fear losing should the system go through a major transformation. So, their political positions are not wrong; they’re right for the class in power which they have no animosity with and wrong for working class. Their support for the Democrats leaves them with no answer to the reality of deteriorating living standards of working people, especially when corporate profitability is at all time high. They also are forced to remain silent or make excuses about policies adopted by their president that they used to scream foul when the other party was in White House. They balk at criticism from the left by saying there is no better alternative, but their disingenuousness comes to fore when a real alternative begins showing up on streets in the form of protests and civil disobedience and they begin urging people to go home and wait until election time to take their anger to voting booths and exercise their right to vote, instead of helping elevate the demands and advocating grassroots organizing and empowerment to effect real change. Accepting the status quo and playing their game is easy, but is it the right thing to do?