------------------------------------------------------------------------From
: •••@••.••• (Robert Hanzel)
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1998
To: •••@••.•••
Subject: Re: cj#864> Blum vs. rkm debate, re: left & right
Let's keep it simple and try this one on for
size. The left or liberal is based on "having a
cause" and the right or conservative is based
on "fear". The only common ground between
both is the rights and liberties of the individual,
the protection of such the primary function of
any government. Remedy? An updated U.S.
Constitution spread around to all nations, a
new model of the Universe based upon a
divinely inspired one but this time including
what the Founding Fathers were unable
to include, economic freedom. United we
stand, divided we fall, together we can find
a better way.
For the protection of individual rights and
liberties, peace and prosperity, love & light,
Yours in the service, VegaBob
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1998
From: [name withheld]
To: "Richard K. Moore" <•••@••.•••>
Subject: Re: cj#864> Blum vs. rkm debate, re: left & right
Dear Richard,
Your fair mindedness and clear expression continue to cement our mutual
understanding. "isms", like religions and other belief systems, are the
common enemy. As Pogo said: "We have met the enemy and they are us" Even my
preference for the scientific process is a belief system, although I
explain it by probability theory & predictive value. What would a jury of
mystics think of me? :-)
Cheers,
>
> Perhaps, but would a skinhead with a swastika tatoo whose father is a DEA
> undercover agent get a fair trial from a leftist jury? With all the circus
> trials that have been going on recently (Rodney King, OJ, et al), we've
> seen impulsive juries on all sides. Prejudice is not a monopoly of the
> right.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 98
From: Koichi Edagawa <•••@••.•••>
To: <•••@••.•••>
Subject: Re: cj#864> Blum vs. rkm debate, re: left & right
>Since globalization threatens all of us, the correct political strategy, I
>suggest, is to identify the principles that unite us, to break through the
>out-of-date categories, and to define an agenda that people generally can
>support. The leaders of the right may be morally unsalvageable, I'm not
>sure, but millions of their followers are sincere people looking for
>answers.
I agree with you.
No more left or right.
Categorization has no meaning and no future.
Koichi.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: •••@••.•••
Date: Sat, 14 Nov 1998
To: •••@••.•••
Subject: Re: cj#864> Blum vs. rkm debate, re: left & right
Richard,
Most of your arguments in the left-right "debate"seem to be saying that it's
unfortunate that there's this divide, that there's no need for it, that it
serves only the power elite, that it could be eliminated with better
communication, etc. All of that MAY be true, but that isn't what I thought we
were debating. I thought we were debating whether the left-right divide
actually EXISTS. You appear to agree with that. I could reply much more to
what you said, but let me make just one more point.
I don't think that the governments of the major countries have abandoned
narrow nationalistic interests and gone transnational along with the
corporations as much as I think you think. The US has had several very
serious conflicts with other nations over trade, pitting their
"transnationals" against those of other countries. Just very recently there's
been the heated dispute between the US and the European Union, which began
over bananas (sic) and quickly spread to threats of tariffs and boycotts of
all kinds of goods. The more things change ...
I think nationalism and patriotism will remain with us and our children for a
long time, as extremely powerful forces, more than religion or family, and
there's nothing to gain by ignoring that.
<< Perhaps, but would a skinhead with a swastika tattoo whose father is a DEA
undercover agent get a fair trial from a leftist jury? With all the circus
trials that have been going on recently (Rodney King, OJ, et al), we've
seen impulsive juries on all sides. Prejudice is not a monopoly of the
right. >>
I never made or implied that statement. I spoke only of one kind of great
injustice, which was a clear case of left-right divide. Again, only to show
that the divide is alive and well and shouldn't be too casually poo-pooed by
you or Carolyn. Your example, I think, reinforces my point about the divide.
The media and politicians have consciously decided to make "leftist" a dirty,
discredited word. I refuse to go along with that.
In leftist solidarity,
Bill Blum
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 14 Nov 1998
From: Jeff Jewell <•••@••.•••>
To: •••@••.•••
Subject: Re: cj#864> Blum vs. rkm debate, re: left & right
Dear Richard, just one comment I'd like to add to your dialogue with Blum re
left/right.
Richard K. Moore wrote:
> It is from the right, in the US and Britain, that voices are raised
> regarding national sovereignty and the preservation of consititutions.
> Instead of seeking common ground on sound principles such as these, the
> left dismisses them as xenophobic, and falls into the divide-and-conquer
> trap. It was a Democrat government in the US that threw away sovereignty
> by bringing in NAFTA, and it is a Labor government in Britain that will
> throw away sovereignty by bringing in the Euro currency.>
The 1980s were marked by the right wing parties sweeping into power in most
western liberal democracies by using the same pro-market anti-government
pitch to trick the unuspecting public into believing that the oligarch's
neo-liberal agenda would better serve the people's interests. Whereupon
globalization was rapidly implemented in the most irreversible ways that
were possible.
The 1990s have been marked by the nominally left/centre parties being
returned to power, largely because the public realized that the right
wingers were serving only elite interests at the expense of the people's
interests. But the oligarchs managed to retain control -- partly because
the radical restructuring under globalization was indeed effectively
irreversible [at least in the sense that no single nation could alone
withstand the punishment that would be swiftly inflicted by the global
market if they were so bold as to defy it] -- but principally through
political manipulation that captured the leadership of the nominally
left/centre party that was positioned to assume power next.
Once again it was the USA that showed the way -- with Clinton demonstrating
how a 'new democrat' could be even more of a neo-con [as in new swindle]
than the right winger he replaced. And of course the Brits were quick to
learn how this new dance goes, and Blair has invented 'new labour' as a
homologous perversion of principle, tradition and language. Canada with
Chretien's 'Liberals' is precisely the same story, as I would expect
Germany and Schroeder's new social democrats will turn out to be, etc.
Hence, while there are parties that still masquerade as being left/centre
as per tradition, the ambitious young men raised from obscurity to lead
them have been well selected and supported by the oligarchs to ensure
continuity of the globalization agenda. This results in many frustrated
and confused backbenchers and party loyalists who hardly recognize their
party and cannot reconcile its purported principles and promises with its
policies -- but they are held in line by the aphrodisiac of power and the
exercise of party discipline.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
a political discussion forum - •••@••.•••
To subscribe, send any message to •••@••.•••
A public service of Citizens for a Democratic Renaissance
(mailto:•••@••.••• http://cyberjournal.org)
----------------------------------------------------------
Non-commercial reposting is hereby approved,
but please include the sig up through this paragraph
and retain any internal credits and copyright notices.
.---------------------------------------------------------
To see the index of the cj archives, send any message to:
•••@••.•••
To subscribe to our activists list, send any message to:
•••@••.•••
Help create the Movement for a Democratic Rensaissance
----------------------------------------------
crafted in Ireland by rkm
-----------------------------------
A community will evolve only when
the people control their means of communication.
-- Frantz Fanon
Share: