Planetarium - politics/music/culture/smarts

Well, yeah.

Um, sure!

What's wrong with friendly smiling? Now you hate smiling?

Hey, Alex, er, Planetarium staff, I have a question for you. Why do you think it is that people on the left don't use the Democratic party to represent them? You know where I'm going with this. I have a rant in my head.

You're right. Of course you're right. I mean, duh. The Clinton-Bush opposition was summed up so nicely by Tariq Ali, last fall, when he compared their respective imperialisms to the imperialisms of Wilson and Teddy Roosevelt. In their means, the differences are negligible, each has some substantive moral and political distinctiveness, but really, the differences are staged: it's all just an ideological light show. Do not mistake this for Nader's argument that there are no differences between the parties. There are differences, and they're tactically important to the strategies we adopt. The point, though, really belongs to Poulantzas: We might have missed it, but the state, all states--as the general political form organizing the hegemony of and competition between different elements of the global bourgeoisie--went fascist at some point in the 30s. The fascism of the US has maintained a relatively liberal facade, but the fact remains: Capitalism would not have survived this long without a turn to a fascist state form.

How did I get onto that? The point that I really wanted to make was that, while I agree with your statements, Planetarium staffers, I think there is room for hope. If anything, the Clinton years represented, in my mind, the end of the Left of the 60s--the evacuation and incorporation of its moral and ethical project into the state apparatuses. The "malaise" of the Left in this period was partially an effect of the New Left's institutionalization--Kerry continues that in that lineage, with his relationship to the veterans' protests against the war in Vietnam. What we have to hope in, I would like to think, is that another left was planted in the 90s, and has begun to take shape in the last five years. It's difficult to identify right now, since we are in such a Popular Frontish moment, with the liberals and the lefties linking arms and breaking out the we shall overcomes, once again. But if Kerry is elected (and Bush lets him take office, which I can't actually imagine) the liberals will fly away, back to the warm loving embrace of the state, and the baby-lefties will kick it. This is my hope. Right now, at least. Come talk to me tomorrow.

The Planetarium crew was just getting a little tired by all the mooning over the Clinton years by every single Democrat (or even just freakin' liberal, these days) on TV or in print these days, whining about how much they miss it. B. Alec, you should let fly with your rant, while we annoyingly remind you that a majority of people who do not consider themselves democrat OR republican are unaffiliated because they feel that the parties have been taken over by the extreme wings of each. That's right: these people think the Democrat party has been barnstormed by radical leftists who now run it.

Totally fair. But isn't all the swooning really just publicity for Clinton's quote memoirs unquote?

We've all come to the unfortunate realization that what we have is a two party system for national elections. Why can't alot of people on the left stand to use the Democratic party as what it is, an organizational structure? Liberal people need to come to understand that the party is only as good as the people who are in it. Voting for the party's candidate has become the only way people are involved. I hear the same thing all the time from alot of people, that the DNC needs to do this or needs to do that, but noone is willing to give their time to go to meetings where you can actually say these things when it counts as a vote. I think people need more civics lessons. Democracy does not equal voting. Think about the NSDAP in Germany and what that accomplished for the Nazis. You don't even need good ideas if you have a good organization. Be a Democrat.

Furthermore, the swooning over Clinton has become an essential tool for highlighting the failures of the Bush Administration. Those on the right still attack Clinton as if he holds office, while the left turns around and uses the 90's/Clinton years as a way to defend Democrats and attack Bush.

Also, Clinton's average job approval hovered around 57%, which is pretty high, and his retrospective approval now is about 62%. So it's no wonder folks on the left will continue to remind the public of Clinton as a way to win back the White House and Senate.

Whether or not Democrats/Liberals in the media genuinely miss Clinton is not the point.

It sucks that what people believe and what they'll say to get an election victory don't usually match. The system is imperfect. I liked Bill Clinton for his sexcapades and the belief that he wouldn't do something to get us all killed. That's become my number one priority in a candidate! Fuck.

The sexcapades or the not getting us all killed?

I know that we're rose-tinting the Clinton years, and part of that's to be expected in retrospective thinking (see: Reagan's death). However, I also think that it's a legitimate longing based on a comparison with the current administration. This is the scariest presidency we've seen, not just something with which we disagree. I've spoken with relatives who had to leave Hungary when the Soviets came, and they're terribly frightened because the rhetoric and the actions are so familiar. Even more disturbing is the apathy a large part of the country flaunts.

If the Dems win, I do worry that nothing will change. If Kerry is the "most liberal" senator (and denies it), that is a huge concern for those of us who see him as a moderate. However, part of the strength of the Republican party is that there is a lot of unquestioning faith in their leadership and dissent is not often made public. While I don't see that as a virtue to aspire to in the Democratic party, it doesn't speak well to the undecided voters that we're not rallying like crazy for Kerry. You've still got your Kucinich freaks, the Nader voters who will probably still vote Kerry at the last minute, and punks with "Edwards for President" signs in their living room.

So do we lie for now and criticize once he's elected? Maybe it's time to suspend disbelief in the two-party system, the race to the center, and forget about what the Democrats have done in the past because this election is so important. And talking about how great Clinton was, glossing over the unfortunate things in his presidency, is a great way to promote voting for another Democrat. Buck up. Go Kerry!