So here we are in 2013, with both the more liberal Democrats, and the more reactionary Republicans locked in mortal combat, like two dueling tarantulas twisted into a death embrace. The GOP continues its stranglehold on legislative progress. Not much gets done -- at least on the federal level. The public loses faith in government -- which pleases Conservatives, as such pox-on-both-their-houses feelings gives Republicans more hope, since a lot more Democrats get disillusioned and drop out of political activism.
The GOP, in control of most of the state legislatures, is moving all sorts of reactionary, crackpot laws onto the books. Of course, it is no small irony that conservative forces, who want to get "big government" off the backs of the citizenry, feel quite comfortable dictating what citizens can and should do with their own bodies and in their own bedrooms. Recent studies demonstrate how authoritarian impulses rule so much of conservative ideology, especially when allied with religious fundamentalism.
TIMIDITY/CONFUSION OF THE LEFT
While one could point hopefully to the shrinking base of the Republican Party and the post-2012 election intra-party philosophical civil war, the Democrats still haven't figured out how to successfully engage the brazen, street-fighting tactics of the Republican HardRight and consequently are losing battle after battle. And yet, despite deserved criticisms of some of President Obama's policies, it's pretty amazing that he's been able to get a few potentially important laws passed that at least keep key liberal social/political/economic issues alive.
Obama should be leading the charge for major change, but his standard M.O. is to nibble around the edges of power but hardly ever to confront the "System" frontally; a centrist-pragmatist, he seems content to take baby steps and to give away much of his political capital in search of the illusionary oasis of bipartisanship. The progressive banner is proudly held up by the likes of Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Alan Grayson, Paul Krugman, Jon Stewart, Rachel Maddow and innumerable bloggers, but they tend to be pretty much marginalized outside the corridors of power.
THE 'OBJECTIVE CONDITIONS'
What can be done? At the very least, the Liberal/Left, now scattered, must become a united, active force. At first, it seemed likely that the Occupy movement might be that political generator. But that exciting development faded away fairly quickly. Most liberals, it seems, can engage their political passions only in brief spurts, but tend to forget that revolution, even a social revolution, needs infrastructure, money and great patience -- years, decades, of hard, slogging work. The Right has spent decades building and putting their infrastructure in place; they can simply outspend, out-organize, outwait whatever the disheveled Left can throw at them -- and they also, by and large, have the forces of police control behind them.
It took several years for the radicals/progressives of the '60s to cobble together the various organizations and factions (anti-war, pro-democracy, civil rights, women's lib) to create The Movement. Finally, they had a counter-weight to the rightwing, and could mobilize quickly and powerfully when called upon to do so.
As was true in the '60s and now in our own time, the objective conditions for "revolution" would appear to exist in America, and elsewhere across the globe. Unrestricted capitalism has created too many problems, seismic cracks are appearing in institution after institution, the populace in country after country is angry and looking for intelligent direction as governments continue in throe to corporate power and the obscenely wealthy who pull the strings.
WHY ISN"T IT HAPPENING?
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
1
1
1
