Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Michael Moore enlists with General Clark: the pathetic—and predictable...

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
Euphen Donating Member (209 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-28-04 03:53 PM
Original message
Michael Moore enlists with General Clark: the pathetic—and predictable...
Edited on Wed Jan-28-04 03:54 PM by Euphen
Michael Moore enlists with General Clark: the pathetic—and predictable—logic of protest politics
By David Walsh
27 January 2004

<snip>

Moore motivates his support of Clark by a near-hysterical fear of George W. Bush. This approach ironically elevates the current occupant of the White House to a stature that he hardly deserves. The Bush presidency is a symptom of the thoroughly diseased state of American capitalism. Bush is the mouthpiece for the most predatory, ruthless sections of American big business. His regime, no doubt the most reactionary in modern US history, has not, however, fallen out of the sky. It is the sharpest expression of the rightward lurch by both the Republicans and Democrats in response to the crisis of the profit system. No one who seriously examines American society could conclude that Bush is the source or at the center of its problems. In the end, Moore’s magnification of Bush is a reflection of his own prostration before the American political establishment.

The demonizing of Bush becomes the justification for opportunist politics. Nothing matters, according to this line of reasoning, except the defeat of Bush at the polls. “Why expend energy on the past when we have such grave danger facing us in the present and in the near future?” writes Moore. A whole host of liberal-left groups and individuals in the US will attempt to use arguments like this over the next nine months as a bludgeon against socialist opponents of the two-party system.

<snip>

Why has the left failed to construct a mass movement in the US? The strength of American capitalism no doubt played a significant role. But this failure has persisted despite the obvious and growing crisis of the system. The absence of a coherent, consciously considered and worked out ideology, indeed the contempt for theory that Moore and others exhibit, has played a huge role. The right wing in America has no intrinsic power or popular appeal, its relative dominance is a function in part of the intellectual bankruptcy of this sort of “left” pragmatism, thoroughly incapable of orienting itself to the historic needs of the working class and the construction of a principled mass movement.

Moore doesn’t have time for thinking; frankly, he only has time for foolish, thoughtless decisions. If former general Clark were to be elected, how would America be different? Instead of the reckless, unilateralist policy of the Bush administration, we would experience the more calculated, perhaps better managed exploitation of broad masses carried out in cooperation with the European and other ruling elites. In short, the return of a Clinton. This is a perspective that is no perspective at all.

.........................

http://wsws.org/articles/2004/jan2004/moor-j27.shtml
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
RandomKoolzip Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-28-04 03:55 PM
Response to Original message
1. This violates several DU rules....
check out the rules before posting RW trash, please.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HFishbine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-28-04 04:04 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. The World Socialists Web Site
is a right wing source?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wonk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-28-04 04:05 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. Um, wsws is waaayyy left, not rw. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DuctapeFatwa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-28-04 04:07 PM
Response to Reply #1
5. One seldom hears the World Socialist Website called "right wing trash"

Do you feel that socialism in itself is right-wing, or just the WSWS?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xultar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-28-04 03:58 PM
Response to Original message
2. He's the guy gettin his ass kicked on the left in my post....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LZ1234 Donating Member (247 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-28-04 04:09 PM
Response to Original message
6. So are you saying Moore ruined it for Clark?
Have you heard Rush Limbaugh on his program? Or O'Reilly or so many RW people with their own shows and microphones? They too say some things that raise eyebrows and cross the line but I don't see a demand for Bush to denounce these people. Bush's requirement wasn't to disassociate from them. Free speech. These RW radio/TV people are like Bush's henchmen. It's hard to see Clark getting this much heat for someone's else's comment. Clark never asked Moore to endorse him and never uttered the word "deserter." Clark had more important things on his mind like trying to run a campaign. In the debate, I could tell Clark didn't want to be drawn into Jennings trap. Although Clark did not make the accusation he didn't deny it either because he didn't know all the facts. What's wrong with that?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Euphen Donating Member (209 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-28-04 04:12 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. Did you read the article? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tom_paine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-28-04 04:27 PM
Response to Original message
8. Just testing an awesome simile...


Damn, that kicks ass!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
democracyindanger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-28-04 04:31 PM
Response to Original message
9. So who does this guy like?
"...It expresses the political and intellectual limitations, indeed bankruptcy, of an entire trend of current liberal-left thinking in America.

Moore is only one of many in that milieu who are presently weighing in on the respective alleged virtues of Clark, former Vermont governor Howard Dean, Representative Dennis Kucinich of Ohio or Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts."

He doesn't think Clark, Dean, Kucinich or Kerry are worthy. So, Lieberman? Sharpton? LaRouche? Nader?

"A whole host of liberal-left groups and individuals in the US will attempt to use arguments like this over the next nine months as a bludgeon against socialist opponents of the two-party system."

Aha. I'd bet Nader.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Euphen Donating Member (209 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-28-04 04:36 PM
Original message
Actually it seems their running their own campaign.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
democracyindanger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-28-04 04:40 PM
Response to Original message
11. Van Auken
Nader-lite
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cprise Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-28-04 04:44 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. I think I would agree
...much to their credit.

The American Left has been tricked into giving up its economic heritege, and into promoting leaders who will not honestly describe what motivates them or informs their sense of judgement. Everyone is afraid of being called a "socialist", so they come up with nonsensical alternate terms like "third way" and when that fails they start pushing Right-wing programs with abandon.

People simply cannot get the gist of what the New Democrats are supposed to offer, outside of social issues. They think "Oh, Democrats... inclusive of minorities, and er, um, seek lots of corporate money for, ummmm, serving the interests of, er... "

The poor? No.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
StClone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-28-04 04:36 PM
Response to Original message
10. Not a great article
Edited on Wed Jan-28-04 04:39 PM by StClone
The following Clark quotes prove little other than that the war was a success in the strategic terms but does not address the reason for the war or the long-term objectives of Iraq self rule. Clark did a good job of explaining why he wrote what he wrote as an objective writer.

"Clark’s piece went on to suggest that certain difficulties remained, but added, “Still, the immediate tasks at hand in Iraq cannot obscure the significance of the moment. The regime seems to have collapsed—the primary military objective and with that accomplished, the defence ministers and generals, soldiers and airmen should take pride.... As for the political leaders themselves, President Bush and Tony Blair should be proud of their resolve in the face of so much doubt.” This is Moore’s “anti-war” candidate. There is a farcical element to all this."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 02nd 2024, 12:03 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC