Re: [sixties-l] Re: Hitchins on Nader

From: Ted Morgan (
Date: 11/29/00

  • Next message: "[sixties-l] (no subject)"

    Tony Edmonds wrote:
    > I'm not sure I would call it a "blame game."  "Debate" has a more positive
    > cachet and is more accurate.
    Point well taken, with respect to Tony's posting --though not to alot of what
    has appeared in the mass media.
    > Less grief is preferarable to more grief, I assume.  If I thought a more
    > "progressive" presidency was even remotely within the realm of possibility,
    > I would have much more sympathy with the Nader voters in Florida.
    Sure, but short-term grief vs. long-term grief is part of my scenario (see
    below), but it's also crucial to bear in mind the grief caused by Clinton-Gore
    that will continue to be caused by Gore (e.g., Iraq, Colombia, welfare moms,
    > And I reject the
    > >powerlessness implicit in what Tony's says about 'moving away from the
    > center
    > >causing Gore to lose votes.'  Where does that logic lead, Tony?
    > I fear it leads to an accurate assessment of the state of American politics,
    > certainly in the short and mid-term.  Liberal centrism is the best we can
    > reasonably expect.  And that to me is preferable to right centrism.
    On this point, yes.  Liberal centrism is all we're ever going to get if we don't
    proceed down a path that might deliver something else.  How do we escape the
    constant 'trap'of short-and-mid-term 'lesser-evils'?
    > I realize this smacks of defeatism, but I susbscribe to the advice of that
    > great political philosopher Kenny Rogers.  I'm not quitting the game, just
    > waiting until a better hand appears.
    Guess my point is that 'waiting' sounds defeatist, too.  It ain't going to be
    delivered to us.

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 11/29/00 EST