Skip to content or view screen version

How Pseudo-Liberals Hurt Us

changeispossible | 13.04.2003 22:11

Why mainstream liberal revisionism damages the anti-war movement

The War on Iraq has taught us all an important lesson: Might Makes Right. It doesn?t matter what your objective is, he who is loud enough and persistent enough will always prevail. This has always been the Republican way of doing things. Look at Iran-Contra ? just keep saying you are innocent and people will start to believe it. Or look at the 2000 elections ? keep saying you won without backing down and you end up winning even if you didn?t. In other words, NEVER show any doubt or weakness if you want to be successful.

Those to the left of Dick Cheney seem to have never learned that lesson. The so-called ?liberal? opposition in Congress has been absolutely pathetic during this war. This puzzled me for a while, until I realized that these people benefit every bit as much from U.S. Imperialism as the right-wingers. The mainstream liberals aren?t about to give up their spacious homes, extravagant vacations, gas guzzling SUV?s, designer clothing, sending their children to exclusive schools, vacation homes, stock portfolios, and extensive retirement accounts in order to stop an immoral foreign policy. They understand better than anybody that they are living in the lap of luxury because the U.S. exploits the hell out of the rest of the world.

Oh sure, they feel guilty about it, that?s why they identify as ?liberals?. But they aren?t about to bite the hand that feeds them. They would rather soothe their guilty conscience by writing a check to some Sally Struthers-type organization or blather on about their commitment to humanitarianism. For domestic poverty their answer is a never-ending array of failed social programs instead of attacking the system that causes poverty in the first place.

The Tom Daschles and Hillary Clintons have been amazingly compliant considering the fact that our president has just broken International Law, defied the United Nations, and committed what many believe to be War Crimes. While the Left was out protesting the psychotic behavior of this government and getting pepper-sprayed and shot with rubber bullets, the establishment liberals were seated in front of CNN with a bowl of microwave popcorn waving the flag.

Only a week into the war we began hearing cries from some in the anti-war movement that we should be trying to appeal to the mainstream more; that if only we didn?t criticize Bush so much then we?d draw in massive crowds and the ?liberals? would join us in ending the war. This is the same mistake the Left ALWAYS makes ? typical revisionism. It is flawed thinking for two reasons:

1.) It wouldn?t matter how many people you put on the streets, the administration has wanted this war for a decade and there is absolutely NO way they would back down. Look at the U.K. and Spain. Millions marched in some of the demos and it did nothing to dissuade Blair from supporting the war.
2.) The ?liberals? in Congress know that their lifestyles depend on stealing the oil of the Middle East. They may not have the same taste for war that the Bushies do, but they aren?t going to sacrifice their privileged lifestyle for principle. They let the hawks do their dirty work while they reap the benefits.

The idea that some in the anti-war movement have of appealing to the conscience of the mainstream will never work. While the mainstream may prefer peace for the most part, the majority of them DO benefit from U.S. Imperialism. The Bush administration already thought of the morality question and gave them an out: We are ?liberating? Iraqis from an evil dictator. The scenes of dancing Iraqi exiles and Kurdish rebels joyfully toppling statues of Saddam were planned a long time ago. These staged scenes were purposely crafted to ease the conscience of the American public and silence the war critics.

This is why the appeal to the mainstream is just another trap that the Left fell into. Instead of pointing out that Bush is actually a fascist, that this war is a form of genocide, that the motivations for the killing of innocent Iraqis was for pure corporate profit ? we instead were led to use themes like: ?Give Peace A Chance? and ?War Is Not The Answer?. Well, now the pro-war people can throw that back into our faces and tell us that if we had given peace a chance then the people of Iraq would still be living under a dictator. Again, the Left fell into the same trap. Instead, they should have followed the example of the Bush administration and hit hard without compromise or apology.

Representative Democracy has failed us. In a country where getting elected to office costs millions, you can NEVER have a true democracy. Those with power will always win out and get their way. The good news is that the far Left, without any corporate funding, without help from the establishment organizations, and with a virtual media blackout was able to mobilize hundreds of thousands across the country to protest this war, often in hostile environments.

This war has proven that the Left is still a viable force in this country and is in effect the only true opposition. Change will not happen through the ballot box in an era of big money campaigns and rigged elections. Change will happen as more and more people become radicalized and take over the streets and eventually everything else. The temporary street closings we saw at the beginning of the war are only a taste of what the real democracy will look like when a critical mass of Americans have had enough.

As for the establishment liberals, let them whither away. They are ineffective hypocrites. Forget elections and join radical change groups. If you can?t find one you like then start you own. We need to make it clear that America has only two choices: A.) Enslavement and eventual death under the Bush Corporate Killing Machine OR B.) Liberation through Participatory Democracy and revolutionary socialism.

changeispossible

Comments

Display the following 2 comments

  1. What about working for a real democracy — Hans U.
  2. PR? — reformist