- Capitalism and Alternatives -

Godwin's Law and the Turd in the Punchbowl

Posted by: Krasny ( Internationale, All Countries... ) on February 04, 19100 at 10:43:29:

: : [snip]
: : :
: : : *I believe I have indicated that as a member of that constantly dwindling voting elite, the choice between Edwards and Duke is an obvious (as in 'all the important decisions as to *whom* have already been made and here's what we're offering you') one. *Not* that it's not important enough, as a progressive, to compromise on.

: : That was my only point.

: : :Personally, I'm of the opinion that at least with a Duke as Governor, the whole issue of racism, creationism, White Supremacy, etc., which exists independent of who's Governor, is put on the front burner... so it's not all bad... ya carrot munchin' PETA extremist...:)* --K

: : Sometimes I think like that too. Sometimes I just want to see the Republican Right take over completely so people can see what's up without the mitigating effects of progressives in Congress. That would be satisfying on a certain level, but the damage they would inflict on the vulnerabe of society (as Duke would have) is too high a price to pay (by the way, K, here's some dental floss -- you can use it to remove those bits of decomposing flesh from between your teeth :))

[Spock Remarked:]



: You know, the communists in 1933 Germany decided not to fight the Nazis, reasoning that fascism would bring its opposite, communism. The communists decided to wait the Hitler regime out, and even in cases welcomed it as makikng contradictions clear. Well, we all know what happened there/

: (Does this violate Godwin's Law?)

**More a case of Miller's Paradox I should say comrade...:)

Aside from the fact that your example is an oversimplification (some of Bertoldt Brecht's best stuff was written during this time of struggle not only against the Nazi's, but against apathy and resignation within the international communist movement itself), I should say the wider issue is: should we support a 'democracy' which is only permitted to operate insofar as the 'ordained' candidates and parties are in a position to win? If we should fight the war of democracy to win, then can we do that while simultaneously lending creedence to the very system we seek to overthrow?

This goes back to the idea that the real contest for 'hearts and minds' (to employ an unfortunate American Vietnam-era euphemism) will be waged between fascism and communism... between a vision of humanity as profoundly inequal and one where mankind is seen as profoundly equal. The current bourgeois state wants the rhetoric of equality with a practice of inequality and they do not want anyone, fascist or communist, pissing in *their* pool.

I think where MDG and I differ is on this question. He is of the opinion (if I may be so bold comrade...) that we can (and should) dip a cautious toe in the icy waters of bourgeois politics long enough to keep the Lesser Evil from drowning; then take our piss. I'm more of the opinion that we shouldn't waste our time on these bastards and instead spend it showing the system up as the cess-pool that it actually is.

In this way, comrade MDG can be seen rowing around the US political cesspool, reaching into it, pulling out a turd and declaring, "This turd is really pissing me off... I'm going to do something about this turd."

Which of course *can* be very similiar in practice to holding up a 'Frenchy' rightwing post to scorn on McSpotlight... --K

Follow Ups:


The Debating Room Post a Followup