BRUCE DIXON TAKES ON "LESSER EVIL" FLETCHER AND DAVIDSON

Bruce Dixon takes on a widely distributed article written by Bill Fletcher and Carl Davidson.  The original article was posted here on August 9th. Bruce's whole response can be read at blackagendareport.com. He summarizes 12 points from the long article and then comments on them.  I will post here a couple of the points to pique your interest.

They say that this really important election is about defending ourselves from the Republican right.

Ever notice how every darn election is the most important one yet? Or how every election is about defending us from the Republican right. None of them are about defending ourselves from the equally if not more dangerous Democratic right. More Democrats than Republicans in Congress voted for the Bush bailout of September 29. When it lost, Bush called in Barack off the campaign trail. Obama worked the phones and whipped Democratic votes into line so that the Black Caucus for instance, which voted 34 to 8 against the Wall Street bailout on September 29 endorsed it 32 to 10 on October 3. That Bush bailout was only for $3 trillion. Once in office, Barack, according to the Wall Street Journal and Bloomberg News, handed out $15 or 16 trillion more.

Fletcher and Davis say “this is not a referendum on the 'America of Empire'”, instead it's one that pits “'the America of Popular Democracy'... the changing demographics of the US... against the forces of... far right irrationalism...” so Obama's actual record is beside the point.

This is almost too weak and shabby to poke fun at. If the discussion is about empire, Fletcher and Davidson can't win. The First Black President invaded and overthrew an African country, Libya, is launching daily drone strikes into the horn of Africa, possibly Mali, and certainly Pakistan and Yemen, and has carried out military adventures Bush and Cheney could only dream of doing without massive upheaval at home. The notion that Obama, the president who coordinated military-style assaults against the occupy movement nationwide last year is on the side of “popular democracy” is also laughable. Obama supporters desperately need his actual record in office excluded from any discussion, or they know they cannot win.

1. Fletcher and Davidson claim progressives will have more room to operate under Obama, so again, complaining about what the Obama administration has or hasn't done is “of little help at this point.”
   Again, they cannot win discussions about Obama's actual four year record, so Obama supporters have to either lie about that record or rule such discussions off the table.
   As for the notion that progressives have more “room to maneuver and organize” under a Democrat than under Republicans, the last four years should disabuse us of that. Carl's and Bill's nonsense about supporting "the America of Popular Democracy" by organizing independently on the ground while supporting Obama and presumably Congressional Dems as well didn't pass the smell test four years ago and stinks even worse today.  To cite just one glaring example, in just about every state in the union there are pro-privatization, anti-teacher, anti-public education referendums, often binding or tied to state constitutional amendments on the November 2012 ballot that will enable the proliferation of charter schools despite the wishes of local communities.  These are not abstract questions --- they have immediate and far-reaching local and national implications for public education, for the cause of privatization, for the stabilization of communities and much else.  The Obama administration, and usually Republicans as well as corporate Democrats on the ground are aggressive supporters of this stuff.  
   Bill and Carl would have us organize to defend public education, at the same time that we get out the vote for a president and Democrats down the ticket to state legislators, county boards and city halls leading the attacks against teachers and public schools.  
   You could make similar arguments that support for Obama actively directly undermines, subverts and contradicts  local organizing against nuclear power, which Obama is a big fan of, or reining in the telecoms, or opposing wars in Asia and Africa, or standing up for the rights of prisoners or Palestinians or the immigrants who Obama has deported in record-breaking numbers, or the work to keep homeowners in their homes.  How do Bill and Carl expect people on the ground to further any of this work while they make excuses for Obama who directly opposes them on all these fronts and more?