Back to home page
ISR Issue 50, November–December 2006
LETTER FROM THE EDITORS
Marx matters
THREE IMPORTANT themes run through this issue of the ISR: the problems of U.S. imperialism, particularly in the Middle East; the Minuteman Project and immigration in the U.S.; and the relevance of Marxism today.
Noam Chomsky, in an interview with David Barsamian, details the hypocrisy and double standards of U.S.-Israeli policy in the Middle East, reviewing Israel's attack on Lebanon and Gaza, the role of Hezbollah, and Israel's plans to “finish off” Palestinian nationalism. Hadas Thier, in a complementary piece, offers a brief history of Israel's last invasion of Lebanon, in 1982. Saman Sepehri considers if and why the U.S. will pursue its plans to attack or invade Iran as part of its attempt to assert U.S. hegemony in the region. David Whitehouse and Avery Wear argue that calls for U.S. intervention in Sudan are part of a campaign to rehabilitate U.S. imperialism at a moment when its bloody interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan are faltering. And Iraq War veteran and resister Camilo Mejía takes a look at the growth of soldiers' resistance to the war in Iraq and also examines the abysmal treatment of women in the military.
In the aftermath of last spring's massive pro-immigration marches, we have seen a tremendous bipartisan attack against undocumented immigrants. Parts of the failed Sensenbrenner Bill have been brought back in piecemeal fashion in the form of separate bills to build a border fence and toughen border “protection,” an intensification of Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids and deportations, and various state and local anti-immigration initiatives. Josh Gryniewicz looks at the growth of the Minutemen, and why this organization, with its close ties to neo-Nazis, has been catapulted into the mainstream, and how a movement must be built to resist them. Phil Gasper, in his regular column, also takes a fresh look at the issue of immigrant rights. The reports section clears up the recent media flap over a meeting at Columbia University by Minuteman Project leader Jim Gilchrist that was shut down after students protested it.
Two chapters from ISR managing editor Paul D'Amato's new book, The Meaning of Marxism (Haymarket Books), deal with the question of Karl Marx's relevance today and take on the standard arguments against Marxism's applicability to the United States. ISR editor Ahmed Shawki offers some observations as to what kind of organizations, in light of past and recent history internationally, the Left should be building today; and Todd Chretien offers an in-depth review of a newly-published book by the late French Trotskyist Pierre Broué, rich in lessons for activists today, on the almost forgotten German revolutionary struggles between 1917 and 1923.
In addition, we are featuring an article by left-wing sports columnist Dave Zirin, a funny, but also serious look at the politics and economics of steroids in the U.S. sports industry.
MIDTERM ELECTIONS
Banking on low expectations
THE ISR went to press before the midterm elections were decided, but it has become increasingly clear that the Republican majorities in both houses are under threat, and it is likely that the Democrats will win the House, if not the Senate.
The reasons for the electoral shift have far less to do with any positive alternative presented by the Democrats (they offer none) than with the GOP's meltdown. The Foley sex scandal seems to have been the proverbial “last straw” that tipped the scales, already weighed down by Bush's abysmal handling of Hurricane Katrina; the failed war in Iraq; the mounting war in Afghanistan; the Abramoff financial scandals; and an economic upswing that for workers feels like a recession.
Indeed, what we have seen drearily and predictably playing out is the same election strategy used by John Kerry in the 2004 presidential campaign; pander to the Right by presenting the Democrats as the more fiscally responsible party that will fix the botched job Bush has done in Iraq and free Washington up to more successfully pursue the “war on terror.” The Democrats' domestic strategy, to quote Chris Townsend, political action director of the United Electrical Workers, amounts to “increasingly staking out traditionally Republican positions on various issues such as abortion, guns, same-sex marriage,” as well as immigration.
Kerry lost in 2004. What has changed to make this round different? Quite simply, the scale of Bush's failures.
There have been mounting signs that whole sections of the military and big business have finally turned against this administration. One sign of this shift, among others, is that the major national papers have decidedly turned against Bush. An October 4 Washington Post editorial, for example, complains of “the overwhelming and shocking incompetence with which the administration has managed the war.” This has given the Democrats-who are loathe to make any promises to their “base”-more room to present themselves as the party the ruling class needs to set the ship of state on the right path.
There are those liberals who say that a Democratic majority in the House will begin “By legislating aggressively on ignored issues that people care about” (William Greider in the October 30 Nation), and initiate a series of hearings on the wrongdoings of the Bush administration. But the party's “six-point plan” (which includes raising the minimum wage and cutting subsidies to oil companies) does not even pretend to be so far-reaching.
True, hearings may be one of the few things the Democrats do initiate-as a substitute for doing anything substantive. While these hearings may expose the incompetence and corruption of the GOP, Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has already ruled out the possibility of impeachment hearings, saying, “We don't have time for that.” And there are reports that Democrats will move “cautiously” against Bush's tax cuts.
On the key questions-such as Iraq, the so-called war on terror, and immigration-the Democratic Party has already spoken. It isn't necessary to wait for a Democratic majority in Washington to see what's in store for us. In September, Illinois Senator Barack Obama joined New York Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton and twenty-four other Democratic senators to authorize a series of anti-immigration measures proposed by right-wing Republicans, including the construction of a 700-mile border fence. Sixty-four House Democrats supported the legislation, up from the thirty-six Democrats who supported tough legislation last December.
And while leading Democrats are willing to couple calls for “border enforcement” with employer-backed support for a guest-worker program, many Democrats are running campaigns to appear tougher than Republicans on the issue. As the New York Times reports,
In North Carolina, Heath Shuler, a former Washington Redskins quarterback who is running for Congress, ran a television advertisement declaring he would never “give amnesty” to illegal immigrants. In Georgia, Representative John Barrow has played up his vote to build a fence on the southwest border. In Ohio, John Cranley, the challenger to the Republican incumbent, Representative Steve Chabot, has accused Mr. Chabot of voting to legalize hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants.
Representative Harold E. Ford Jr., the Democrat running for Senate in Tennessee, won't be outflanked on the right by Republicans. “They think they can come in here and just malign me as this Democrat that is out of touch, whose views don't comport with mainstream conservative values. But we've been able to withstand that.”
In early September, the Senate voted 98-0 to approve Bush's request for $450 billion in Pentagon spending, including $70 billion for combat operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. Twelve Democratic senators joined Republicans to pass the shameful torture legislation that suspends basic civil rights such as habeas corpus in the name of the “war on terror.”
If anyone wants a sense of what a Democratic legislature might do, have a look at Colorado, where Democrats won majorities in both the House and Senate in 2004. In mid-July, the state legislature held a special five-day session to pass eleven anti-immigrant measures that would deny most non-emergency state benefits to undocumented workers eighteen years old and older-forcing people applying for benefits to first prove their legal residency.
This hasn't stopped the AFL-CIO from shelling out $40 million to get Democrats elected on the grounds that it's the best we can get. The Democrats have lowered expectations so far that noone has real hope that they will make any significant changes. But they hate what exists. As the Democrats lurch further and further to the right, however, the lesser-evilism that traps the Left and the unions into voting against themselves becomes more and more untenable.
|
