Re: [sixties-l] Gore v. Bush

From: Ted Morgan (
Date: Fri Jun 23 2000 - 20:05:31 CUT

  • Next message: Ted Morgan: "Re: [sixties-l] Re: sixties-l-Gore v. Bush"

    Re. Tony's comment:

    > But isn't backing candidates who have no chance of winning and who will take
    > votes away from the less objectionable mainstram candidate part of the
    > problem as well.

    A few quick comments: (a) no, the PROBLEM is the system that forces us into this
    position. How do you propose fixing this problem via the lesser-of-two-evils?
    Why would the winners ever want to change the system that systematically
    advantages them? (b) Who the hell knows for sure re. the future, re. winning,
    etc.? (c) what's "less objectionable" about Gore's 100% support for & advocacy
    of globalization, de-regulation of the media, commercialization of the internet
    (and everything else), funding for Colombia, ... etc. (albeit with some cutesy
    Green or 'liberated' rhetoric thrown in). The MAN (since that seems to be the
    focus of the 'lesser of two evil' folks) is through & through a corporatist/
    market society advocate, etc.


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 23 2000 - 23:42:51 CUT