Liberal communications strategy

The bourgeois politicians are teaching me their way of doing things. There was an effort to introduce me to rulers before 9/11, but I backed off. I know the rulers much better now, but I believe the Democrats would have been in character to be too cowardly to abandon their party prior to the Iraq War. In this, they did the sectarian thing, putting the party interest against the world’s interests. Clare Short has alluded to that. The RCP zombies are the purest expression of that problem.

Let me admit that some Bush and Democratic officials probably believe I ignored them too much before 2004. Actually I listen, but I’m not a big fan of the Liberal way of doing things. If that made me seem too airy, pie-in-the-sky, well I’m not sure. Dealing with Liberals has its costs too and we were building that site for the international proletariat, not fine-tuning. At this late age and level of experience I still find it very taxing to deal with Aesopian and Liberal angles. That could have to do with how the Democratic Party now needs to scrutinize the entirety of my sex life and find something wrong with it every step of the way.

Let me also say some of what the Establishment does lately is very fast. They have very fast copy writers and editors. These politicians think fast on their feet. What I have in common with them is that I am a political junkie.

If one wanted to be counterfactual, say about the years 1999-2005, the question arises of how close was I to being able to change something. Had I had one more persyn, say one more Aesopian analyst or one more comrade hyped on security, would MIM have been able to make a difference?

Public opinion on the Iraq War was pretty divided. The problem was that the Democrats as a party of government had taken a hit and had no basis to stick their necks out to oppose the war, and it would have taken a filibuster. How I saw it was that we had an undifferentiated mass of pre-911 warmongers, pseudo-feminists and racists to work with. Then we had a Spectacle, about which no one was going to listen to a communist.

I don’t think I made the decision. I saw Patrick Buchanan on television before the war saying we may need to have a real debate. Supporting the impersynal forces of history view is that no one subpoenaed me for an investigation. The government was not neutral. Clinton had sanctioned Iraq, controlled its airspace and bombed it. Bush wanted more of the same.

I will admit I start to wonder if the Gaza split 2005- was my fault for not coming up with a strategy to deal with the Liberal complications in my life. On the other hand, there were also advantages of sticking with one road.

To say I could have honed an at least a 15% Liberal communications strategy at the turn of the century and maybe rocked the boat, I don’t think so. And I don’t think people remember what the polls and attitudes were like after 9/11. We did much better on the global scale organizing people.

In the end, the international united front is going to have to be the ones to contain U.$. fascism with ongoing pressure. There is no basis here for resounding success. We at MIM organized the main forces without confusing the international proletariat with Liberal nuances. Frankly I don’t believe that our so-called Left milieu here can even tell the difference. Listening to Alinsky and listening to MIM, they don’t see any contrast.


%d bloggers like this: