Commie Curmudgeon

So far, I have deliberately avoided discussing the matter, but I feel that I need to, because one blog that I've featured near the top of my blog list is basically being turned by its author into a "9-11 Truth" blog. That blog - which I really need to drop from my list now - is Eugene Weixel's Blog . (Of course, this is the one that I had listed as Fat Old Jewish Guy Who Lives In the Projects , but it is no longer being called that either - too bad, because it was a great name for a blog, part of the reason I put it up in the first place - oh, well...).

I have other disagreements with this blogger, and we may be getting into a flame war, but none of those disagreements would have caused me to drop the blog. The main reason I'm dropping it is that I don't want people to go to my blog list, click on his blog, and think that I in any way share his passionate devotion to 9-11 conspiracy theories.

I also have no wish to debate the matter further, and I didn't want to discuss it to begin with. And I refuse to get into a point-and-counterpoint argument about it. If you want to see my counterpoints, the best place to go is CounterPunch. They have published the best articles opposing this waste of a movement, and I fully support everything they have said on that front.

And now I would like to move onto something more relevant and significant (which, in my opinion, would be just about anything).

And horrifying, too. Rest in Peace, Brad.

Brad Will, New York Documentary Filmmaker and Indymedia Reporter, Assassinated by Pro-Government Gunshot in Oaxaca While Reporting the Story

Brad Will, 36, a documentary filmmaker and reporter for Indymedia in New York, Bolivia and Brazil, died today of a gunshot to the chest when pro-government attackers opened fire on a barricade in the neighborhood of Santa Lucia El Camino, on the outskirts of Oaxaca, Mexico. He died with his video camera in his hands....

Oaxaca: NYC Indymedia Journalist, 3 Others, Shot Dead by Government Forces

A shootout has occurred in the municipality of Calicate, in Oaxaca City, Mexico today, leaving New York City Indymedia journalist Bradley Will dead after being shot in the chest. He died before reaching the hospital, according to La Jornada. A photographer from the newspaper millenio diario, who was at Wills side, was shot in the foot and reported injured, his status unknown.

Radio APPO, the radio of the Assembly Popular of the Oaxacan People, are reporting truckloads of armed paramilitaries entering the city. There are also calling for people to reinforce the thousands of barricades that have been constructed for months as part of the statewide teacher strike and popular uprising that has demanded the removal of PRI governor ulisis Ortiz Ruiz....

----------------------
I knew Brad... Many people who were involved in the things that I was involved in in the late '90s and early 2000s did... Defense of squats (I helped him board up his windows at Dos Blocos back in '99); the save-the-gardens movement; direct action protests; the WEF protest/Intergalactic Anarchist Convention... He was a very different sort of person from me and lived a different sort of life, and I can't exactly claim a close friendship there...but I sort of got to like him more over the years. (Actually had some interesting conversations with him a couple of years ago, when he was living at the NYC Indymedia video building called Walker Space, sharing a floor with his then girlfriend Dyan and my old friend and sometimes-collaborator, Priya/Warcry... Interesting space, interesting moments, hanging around there once in a while, before they all got evicted...)

Anyway, just some scattered recollections passing through my mind... Because, because I knew this guy...this was disturbing news to me... Many people die every day in struggles around the world, but it's especially disturbing when somebody you know is killed...gunned down by paramilitary police, no less (which I guess is a more common experience for a lot of people in the world).

The uprising in Oaxaca is an important struggle too. I've been thinking of writing more about that one, but I tend to let other bloggers cover a lot of these international struggles, while I focus on stuff "closer to home." But, of course, it's all connected. I might add some more words, or links, about it soon.
---------------------------
P.S.[10/29-10/31]: Notes from other bloggers, at:

Bombs and Shields

Front de Troglodistes

All Out for the Fight

To the Barricades

Living on Less

Human Iterations
-------------------------------
P.P.S. [10/29]: Not sure if I remembered the name/spelling of Brad's ex-girlfriend completely right. (I actually confirmed this from a mainstream news report - but what do they know?) So, if anybody wants to correct any inaccuracy, please let me know. There seems to have been a lot of readers of this post the past day and a half - thanks to whoever launched it into MySpace. (Perhaps the same person who's done the same thing with a few other posts...)
-------------------------------
11/2: Good follow-up reporting, as well as some NYC IMC statements, can be found at Civil Defense - a weblog by Joshua Breitbart.
--------------------------------
11/9: Nice tribute to Brad from my (sort of) neighbors, More Gardens. There is also a good Friends of Brad Will Web site.

Recently, I found this message on the blog Good Times and Bad Times in Lost America:

I'm happy to serve as an inspiration for some people...

But although the entries on the blog have been pretty benign lately you all should know that I'm basically a Communist, although not a conventional one. I'm anti-statist too but, yes, pretty much a Communist, with a lot of qualifications. They say "Once a Communist, always a Communist" and this is an accurate statement, as I've found out, because of the practical and theoretical unity of Communist ideology. So although I delight in being a backchannel resource for people I think that associating ones self with the blog might have professional consequences if you are in a position where that sort of thing isn't looked upon all that well.

Besides, the people who watch this blog have long memories, and just because the latest blog entries have been accepting of parts of the political system doesn't mean that it has always been this way.

Read at your pleasure, but remember, if you associate yourself with this blog you have to take the consequences that come with it.

And after reading that post, how could I not put this blog at the top of my list?

Actually, my list of blogs on the side is not arranged in any particular order of preference. When I've been putting things to the top lately, it's basically because they're fairly new, and I'd like the few people who read this blog to discover them also because I think they're pretty good in one way or another (or I wouldn't put them on the list in the first place). (Although, I admit, I may have had a couple of other reasons for recently adding E-Blast near the top: One, because it is a blog written by Ben Morea, who was the founder of the fine '60s revolutionary anarchist entities known as Black Mask and Up Against the Wall, Motherfucker; and second, because our mutual friend Eve kind of bugged me to put it up there. But it's a good blog anyway. A little terse for my tastes, and a little to focused on the evils of George W. Bush, but certainly it gets to the point and I'm glad it's up there.) However, getting back to the blog that I'm writing this post about... Once in a while, someone makes a statement that makes me say, "OK, this one has to go to the top, the very top" (even if that is somewhat hierarchical thinking). And the blog that's "Lost in America" qualifies now.

I guess people should know that I, too, am a communist. Just in case you didn't get that at first...

Actually, some people still might consider me an anarchist. And I try to retain strong sympathies with anarchism as a movement, in spite of various disillusionments. But I often find myself getting into discussions with anarchists that give me the feeling that, no, this thing called "anarchism" as a movement just won't suffice for me anymore. I realized this quite a bit with certain recent correspondences. (But don't worry, William Gillis, I'm not talking about my last e-mail exchange with you! Actually thinking about some other things...)

Of course, some people might say, there have been plenty of people out there who should give me some pause in calling myself a communist. But in the present place and context, I am just more happy to join in solidarity with someone who comes right out there and says that he is a communist, especially if he adds that he's an anti-statist communist.

And it's a very good blog too.
--------------
P.S. Oh, yeah, another reason for changing it on my list and putting it at the top...as I just realized...is that it's changed its name. It used to be called "Times of hate, times of joy"...or that's at least how I had it listed.

I was very interested to read a site from a group called the Rock Dove Collective, which seeks to "address the need for helpful, accessible, non-hierarchical health assistance in our communities." This is an anarchist group that is obviously very aware of the concept of mutual aid (as anti-capitalists should be, whether or not we are calling ourselves anarchists) and seeks to apply that belief to the area of healthcare. As I have been saying for a long time, healthcare is one area where radicals and, especially, anti-authoritarians might do well to focus some more of their energies. I have always felt that this area was neglected especially in the anarchist crowd because so many people who call themselves anarchists these days are young, and young people in most situations do not have as great an understanding about the necessity for healthcare as the middle-aged or the elderly. I gather from Rock Dove's listing that they themselves are generally pretty young, but I hope that they can build a network that addresses the growing need for accessible healthcare among older people.

One thing in Rock Dove's listings that I might quibble about, which I have found to be a general issue among groups and people who are interested in building something outside of the capitalist system of healthcare, is the repeated mention of addressing people's "spiritual wellbeing"; another is the mention of certain members' knowledge of Yoga. Personally, I believe that those sorts of things should not be prominently mentioned by groups that set out to help remedy the concrete medical problems that so many people face as a result of capitalist-controlled, market-based healthcare. This is especially true for the U.S., where we don't even have a national health system. I think that it is most urgent for us to try to build a network for people who need access to medical services, and I am not convinced that Yoga or "spirituality" have to be connected to that, nor do I think that many other people who are in search of badly needed healthcare want to hear about such things.

In the past, I've spoken to other people who were very involved in thinking and writing about the problems of healthcare in this country who also sought to mix their emphasis on providing greater access to healthcare with an emphasis on "alternative" healthcare, including not only Yoga, but homeopathy, all kinds of herbal treatments that have never been adequately proven to be effective through empirical data and/or scientific methods of reasoning (at least not from what I can tell) and even, in the worst scenarios, quasi-psychic methods of healing involving magnets and prisms or crystals. And though I have not encountered people who believe this personally, I would guess that there are many out there who think the issue of healthcare should also include psychic or spiritual healing whereby you could help to cure someone just by touching that person and thinking or praying. But I hope that there are relatively few people who really think that building an alternative system of healthcare involves such far-fetched ideas about "alternative healthcare."

Personally, I have never been convinced that 99 percent of the "alternative" methods discussed by many people are the least bit effective. On the other hand, I have often been amazed by the effectiveness of medicine in quieting pain or healing infections. I still have a lot of confidence in the effectiveness of scientific medicine in addressing immediate health concerns. I think that doctors can be very flawed and medical institutions can be very screwed up, especially if they're overburdened, state-funded places ostensibly designed to address the concerns of people who have no health insurance or who are poor. I've had more than enough experience with those places to know how problematical they and their services can be. However, when I am sick or in pain, I believe that there is nothing as effective as scientifically proven medicine to address my ills. It may be true that I might be a little healthier if I lived in a more psychologically healthy environment, but once I have a health concern that needs to be addressed immediately, I want to find competent people who have been scientifically trained in medical practices and find some effective medicine. Moreover, I am sure that most people wanting for adequate healthcare services feel the same way.

I never agreed with the belief that being politically radical or being anti-capitalist meant being open to, and encouraging, non-scientific methods of addressing clearly biological or physical problems. I also never understood how some people who are anarchist think that it is anarchist to promote magical thinking. To the contrary, I think it is most anarchist (and most socialist or most communist) to address the problems of the world through rational thinking, to counter the irrationality found in both capitalism and the social-economic systems that preceded it.

There are problems with the way that medical science as we know it is organized and the kind of access that people are given. This is true in a way that goes beyond the problem of people being denied access entirely as a result of the market system. The truth is, people in general are denied any sort of autonomy in addressing their own healthcare problems. There are many kinds of information that people can learn in order to address health concerns without consulting an elite group of experts with all their safely guarded knowledge (purchased through enrollment in expensive institutions, etc.). I believe that the majority of tasks and much of the knowledge that we presently delegate to overpaid experts can be learned in a useful way by the majority of "ordinary" people. This is a problem having to do with the division of labor and very rigid hierarchies built into our healthcare system. And radical or anarchist groups are very correct to address this problem when seeking to build alternative means through which people can have healthcare.

On the other hand, it would probably be best not to emphasize the other kind of "alternative" healthcare in too central a way when trying to build such an alternative system. This is especially true when concern for the "spiritual" leads people into promoting overtly magical thinking. (And note that I am especially concerned when the word "spiritual" implicitly includes religion or magic. I know that a lot of people talk about "spiritual" needs when what they really mean is general emotional and intellectual wellbeing. But I think we should be careful not to use the word "spiritual" in such a way because it can mean these other things.) When religious or magical thinking is mixed in with providing healthcare, then the alternative healthcare group might become too much like so many religious charity services which, at various levels of intensity, mix their charitable assistance of the poor with subtle or overt preaching. It can be like seeking shelter from the Catholic Worker or seeking extensive help from the Salvation army or, even worse, going for free Indian food from a Hare Krishna center. (I've known people who often went to the Krishnas to get free Indian food. They said they could enjoy the free food without paying any mind to the quasi-Hindu(?) preachings. And, as a big fan of Indian food (and many other things desi or Indian), I'm sure that some of the meals that they got were very enjoyable. However, I'm not sure if I, personally, could ever go for the free food if it means putting up with all the other stuff.)

In the area of healthcare, I think it would be wonderful to build up networks that could help people to get greater access and maybe also help to spread more knowledge among the general population. So, let's try to unite in our desires and efforts to do so, with an emphasis on those services and remedies that most of us can recognize as real (scientific, medical) healthcare.
-----
P.S. Most of my comments above do not pertain directly to Rock Dove, which I know very little about at this point. (Although, I am thinking that maybe I will attend their public presentation on November 2, 7 pm, at Bluestockings.) It's just that I start thinking about certain problems whenever people start including Yoga and this word "spiritual" in their discussions about providing healthcare. For the most part, I think that the Rock Dove Project, as it is spelled out on this site, looks like a great idea.

I was going to do another "This Week I'm Listening To" post, but it was mostly the same stuff I was listening to last time. So this time, thought I'd just mention something really nice that I picked up. Which is, as I mention above...

DJ /Rupture - Special Gunpowder: Cutting-edge dancehall music. Experimental rap. Beatnik toasting. A poem about the burning of MOVE - a first-hand account from the heart of West Philly - spoken over cool jazz saxophone interspersed with electronic beats. A strange new version of the traditional folk ballad, “I Wish I was a Mole in the Ground,” a song that was originally recorded by a North Carolina lawyer in 1924 and used by Greil Marcus as one of the main focal points (along with Situationism and the Sex Pistols) in Lipstick Traces, his opus book on underground pop revolutions. (I admit, I have been waiting for a while for someone to do a good version of that song - never thought it would pop up on a dancehall/hip-hop/electronica CD.)

This CD mixes things up a lot. And everyone knows how much I like music that mixes things up. Though it may not be as cohesive as some other things I’ve gotten into lately that really mixed things up... Reminds me of seeing a series of different skits in some “downtown” theater club. But that’s also a testament to DJ /Rupture’s impressive eclecticism. Altogether, this is a very good, exciting, innovative disc.

There is a very good article out on Dissident Voice , written by Lara DeLuz, called America's Newest Civil War: A Secession Along the Economic Divide. It starts off by discussing the tragedy of the Ramirez family, which involved a mother and six children who died in a fire in Chicago caused by the candles that they were living by for the four months since their energy had been turned off. This was a dramatic reminder that a lot of families in the U.S. are experiencing very hard times right now, contending with increasing poverty and being neglected completely by all levels of government.

The article goes on to discuss the obscene amount of money spent on the "War on Terror" and how much that money would help, instead, if it were applied to social programs in the U.S. and/or it were spent to help Katrina victims (so many of whom are still enduring hardship of one kind or another) and/or went to provide health coverage to the nearly 47 million people in the country who presently don't have any (including yours truly)... There's no point in quoting that part here in any detail, because these facts have been discussed here before. Moreover, the title of the article says more about the situation than anything else.

But I would like to quote a very nice surprise at the end of the article, a wonderful snippet of interview with Harry Belafonte, conducted by Amy Goodman. (By the way, I am not really the biggest Amy Goodman fan. But once in a while she brings us some great interviews). Here, I think he makes some excellent points:

Amy Goodman: You call President Bush a terrorist?

Harry Belafonte: I call President Bush a terrorist. I call those around him terrorists, as well: Condoleezza Rice, Rumsfeld, Gonzales in the Justice Department, and certainly Cheney. I think all of these men sit -- and women -- sit in the midst of an enormous conspiracy that has been unraveling America for the last eight years -- six years. It is tragic that the dubious way in which this president acquired power should have begun to unravel the Constitution and the peoples of this country.

Yes, I say that there are people in this country who live in terror. Poverty is terror. Having your Social Security threatened is terror. Having your livelihood as an elderly person slowly disappearing with no replenishment is terror. Students who are dropping out of school because there are no resources to keep us in school are terror. You find people in the streets, watching drugs permeate our communities and destroy our young; it's a life of terror. And men who sit in charge of that distribution mechanism, which can help the American people overcome these problems and refuse to do so, while giving the rich more money than they've ever dreamt of having, while turning around our institutions and redirecting resources from those who are truly in need to those who are already generously endowed, if not hedonistically so, it's a great tragedy ...

Although I hope that Mr. Belafonte realizes that the Democrats are quite complicit in this terror as well. Once, a long time ago (but well within Harry Belafonte's time), we did have a Democratic president who said he was declaring a war on the kind of terror that Belafonte speaks of, a War on Poverty. Only instead, most of the effort got squandered on another war that had more than a few things in common with the present fiasco in Iraq.

As I said during a dialogue in my comments section a short while ago (hard to place which comments exactly, so I'm not going to link to them right now)... I find it hard to believe that "our" government would ever make dealing with poverty a higher budget priority than waging imperialist wars. Certainly, during Johnson's administration, new programs and efforts were initiated (most of which have been chopped down or completely destroyed by now), but even back then, public funds that were supposedly going to go to people who really needed them ended up being diverted for the sake of senseless slaughter and the fattening of the MIC.

Though I guess things are worse now than they ever were. And Belafonte's words about the present situation get right to the point. How many other famous popular performers in our midst would come right out and call George W. Bush a terrorist? Granted, Bush bashing has been much more acceptable in the pop world during the past year or two, but few have approached Harry Belafonte in the ability and willingness to tell it like it is.
----------------
P.S. The man deserves a tribute album. Has anyone done one yet? We should get together a bunch of dynamic contemporary performers for the task. Start by finding someone who could do a fantastic version of "Day-O." (Actually, I'm thinking of someone right now... But I'm not going to say it...)

I suppose I should write a comment about CBGB, which is set to close this Sunday. This place was such a great influence for me in my formative years, back in the mid-late ‘70s. Although I should add that this influence was more through recordings made by groups from that scene - live recordings at the place, played on obscure radio shows, as well the first records by bands who played there, in ’75 and ’76: Patti Smith, Ramones, Blondie, maybe Television... I was actually too young to go there (and get past the door) back in its true heyday, given that I was only 14 or 15 years old. Although I did timidly slip into the place once or twice way back in those days (and discovered that they did card, at least sometimes). And I did go to an unforgettable show at the short-lived CBGB Theater (down the street) on New Years Eve of 1977 to ’78 - starring Patti Smith, Richard Hell and the Voidoids, and Mars - and saw some pretty good shows in the club itself a bit later, as late as 1979. (So I’ve got to admit it was a vital venue, at least to me, as late as 27 years ago...)

Back then, the neighborhood itself was also a fitting place in which to experience the “underground” of music and culture. I’ve got mixed feelings about the fact that I (among many other people) actually got some thrills from the danger of looking for my music and culture in “scary” neighborhoods like the ‘70s-era Lower East Side or the Bowery back when it still was really Skid Row. It was sort of like taking a “cheap holiday in other people’s misery” (to quote a line from a band that was starting to do similar stuff over in the UK at about the same time). On the other hand, having grown up in some heavily inner-city-type neighborhoods in The Bronx, I could also relate to the deeply urban aura - much more, in fact, than I could to the free-wheeling, laid-back (stoned out) and road-happy aura that seemed to be so prevalent in popular American rock at the time. (I just couldn’t relate to so much of that crap.) Plus, there was something admirable about bands putting up with the most dilapidated surroundings in order to have a place where they could explore a new and different sound (not to mention the people who would go to those places to see/hear them – many of whom were also in bands that played there). And there was a nice connection between the no-frills atmosphere and the early punks’ desire to reject all the ostentatious excesses that characterized the rock music industry. So, altogether, CBGB and its rough surroundings were a good match. In fact, I can’t imagine how any club like this could have emerged and thrived the way it did if it had to start from within some expensive neighborhood occupied by high-earning business careerists...

Which is exactly what the neighborhood and The Bowery are looking like these days. The other day, I was walking around there, and it really struck me how slick and soulless the neighborhood had become. It’s a shame that the process of gentrification always ends up turning once-interesting neighborhoods into bland shopping malls. Admittedly, there are often stages in the process that actually can make a neighborhood a better place to live for a while. My own present neighborhood is just beginning to go through those stages, so it’s much safer and cleaner than it used to be – though it’s still not nearly gentrified enough to make most people with money feel safe, and I would actually hate to see the area “improve” any more than the condition it’s in at the moment, which suits me just fine (though it would suit me better if I ever seriously learned Spanish, I suppose). But for some reason, once money starts pouring into an area in a big way, there’s no stopping that area from eventually becoming so corrupted by investment, that no one with any character can afford to live, thrive or create there anymore.

The Lower East Side in general still has some interesting places, especially if you have at least a little money to do some shopping. I’ve been going there more these days because of the independent record stores not far away from CBGB, such as Other Music and Etherea, though I have no business buying CDs with my low annual income and my serious level of debt... But I’ve experienced a resurgence of interest in new music again – mainly electronica and cutting-edge dance music, stuff that’s extremely different from the old sounds at CBGB, but at the same time has more of the old adventurous spirit, at least in my mind, than most punkish rock stuff of the present day. So, that’s the only reason I ever even walk around there anymore. But I drag down there because I’m looking for recorded music; I can’t really imagine finding any venue in the area that would be a truly exciting place to hang out and see a band...

Which all adds up to the fact that it’s extremely appropriate for CBGB to move on. There was some movement, some benefits, etc., to try to keep this club open despite the fact that the owner could no longer pay the neighborhood rents. However, I can’t be too sad about the fact that those efforts did not succeed. It is really time to see this place go, after an unbelievable, completely unexpected, stretch of 33 years.
------
P.S. There was an article that came out close to two years ago in New York Press (when the impending close of CBGB was first discussed) which echoes my own feelings about the club and the neighborhood pretty closely (found, btw, courtesy of Shawn at Front de Troglodistes).

P.P.S. I wish I could go into more enthusiastic detail about how wonderful this music was for me at the time… Right now, though, I’ve got to admit I’m not even in the mood to hear any of it. I go through phases like that. I return to the old punk and proto-punk now and then, but I never could get stuck in playing the music of my youth over and over the way so many people do. I’m not boasting about it - in fact, it probably would be better if I did stay satisfied with the music of my youth; that way, I wouldn’t periodically get into this trap of spending money that I don’t have (a real American-capitalist tradition) in the constant quest to acquire new sounds.

Which is not all to say that I can’t still enjoy the old stuff very much on occasion...

A little over two years ago, I wrote a blog post about re-enjoying the music of Patti Smith. In that post, I think I described my memories of Patti and CB’s very well. I also described the great feelings I can get from some of that old music (just a small portion of it) when I’m in the right phase or mood. In the long run, some of it will last with me forever, though most of it really was here today, gone...you know...

I’m sure nobody would be surprised at my perspective on this matter, but I thought I’d take a moment to express my utter disgust with the Democratic Party (again, anyway) and my frustration with some well-intentioned liberals I’ve encountered who are looking back to the Golden Age of Clinton and seem to have completely forgotten about “ending welfare as we know it,” NAFTA, Bill Clinton’s great fondness for capital punishment, and the numerous bombings of several different countries waged by the Clinton government. In fact, I spoke to someone in a workplace last week, someone who’s very well intentioned, who literally didn’t remember anything about Clinton’s actions on welfare or NAFTA or his stance on capital punishment. And this was a mature adult who seems to be relatively aware of current events in the world. Other people, I believe, are far less well informed. In fact, when I go out into the world of people beyond a tiny core of anarchists and ultra-leftists, it seems that most people who oppose the present government’s actions are fooling themselves into thinking that many of the bad domestic and foreign policies that it has so successfully advanced will simply disappear if and when the Democrats regain the White House and/or a majority in Congress. (As though Democrats never fully supported an imperialist war started with a lie, etc., etc….)

The past month or so, I’ve been frequently visiting the blog Stop Me Before I Vote Again – Dedicated to the deconstruction of the Democratic Party, which is an excellent chronicle of all the reasons that the Democrats give us, day after day, not to give a shit about their party and not to believe for a minute that the vast majority of them have any real principles or are the least bit capable of creating genuine opposition to the political status quo. Although if I didn’t know better, I would at least think that people could get that impression from looking at the mainstream news, if you are the least bit informed about anything. This party couldn’t even get together enough votes in Congress to stop the passage of a law that basically ended habeas corpus, a right which had been built into English and American laws for about 900 years. (Plus, one might add, even the most vocal Democratic opponents of this law seemed to have completely forgotten about that tactic known as a filibuster - hmm...)

There are a couple of reasons to sort of want the Democrats to take control of Congress… One is emotional urge simply to see so many Republican bums kicked out of office. I admit that even I fall prey to such urges and thus might get a slight emotional lift from a massive Democratic victory… Not because I will celebrate the victory of the Democratic Party, only because I will celebrate the possible end of a few despicable political careers. (Although it seems as though a few despicable careers are already being ended, for reasons that have nothing to do with any significant politics, well before election time...)

Another reason maybe to hope for a Democratic victory is that there may be some hope that some atrocious tendencies of the Bush administration won’t be so quickly and easily rubber stamped in the next couple of years – not because there will be more congressmen who would oppose such policies out of principle, but simply because some of the same cowards who do the rubber stamping now will be less inclined to do so within a Democratic majority. But I don’t think that such an outcome is in any way guaranteed.

Some people claim that a Republican victory might be better because it will ensure greater disgust and greater resistance to the present economic and social policies, which the Democrats would probably continue to pursue anyway, only in a more sophisticated way, and with more people reluctant to oppose them because of the knowledge that “the Republicans would be even worse.” (That psychology certainly was prevalent enough during the Clinton administration, which is why Clinton was able to get away with more regressive, right-wing policy changes (especially on the economic front) than either Bush I or Reagan could ever have pushed through.) One might say that the reelection of Bush somewhat proved the point above, given the public mood about the “direction” of the nation and the war on Iraq. However, while I see a lot of disgust, I don’t see a lot of resistance. In fact, active public resistance has actually drastically declined over the past couple of years.

If anything, we could argue that a Democratic victory will more likely lead to a higher amount of resistance, because people will be very quickly disappointed in their hopes for great changes, once they see that basically nothing has changed.

However, honestly, don’t have much faith in that sort of speculation either.

Most likely, if we see any major social changes, the elections will have nothing to do with that.

Although I should add that I really am not one of those big anti-voting campaigners either… I would say, go and vote if you feel like playing that game because it makes very little difference whether you do or not. And maybe it would be nice for people to register their dissatisfaction with the bums in office, even if those bums will simply be replaced by other bums. (And by the way, I am using the term “bums” in a very specific manner here, to indicate worthless, no-good people. I do not mean to insult the real homeless people, unemployed people, hobos, etc., who are commonly referred to as “bums,” by comparing them to the disgusting politicians in Washington, DC.) Or, maybe it would be nice for there to be a surprisingly large vote for other/third parties (other than the Joe Lieberman party, that is), so that people can show their dissatisfaction with the two-party system (not that I see any hope in that happening in a major way).

But I can’t express enough – in case I haven't made this clear yet – how little I care for or about the Democrats and their aspirations to take control of Congress or the White House so that they can make a few superficial and cosmetic changes while doing most of the same thing(s).

------------
P.S. A few things about my own voting record - in case newer readers are wondering for some reason - since I haven't gone into this for a while...

Votes for President: 2004, Ralph Nader; 2000, Nobody (I think I went to some kind of DAN meeting instead); 1996, Ralph Nader (a last-minute change, as I recall, from my intention to vote for Mary Cal Hollis of the Socialist Party USA); 1992, Bill Clinton (because back then I was a slightly different person, I was so disgusted with Bush and Reagan, and I would learn my lessons soon enough).

Votes for Senator: I voted for David McReynolds in 2004. I think he ran as the Green Party candidate, though I always identified him in my mind with the Socialist Party U.S.A., even when I voted for him. I can't for the life of me remember anyone else whom I've voted for for Senator in recent memory, only I'm sure very few of them had anything to do with a major party.

I did vote for Fernando Ferrer (a Democrat) for mayor in 2005 and even endorsed him here, at the last minute, out of disgust with the likely prospect of a Bloomberg landslide (which did happen, pretty much). I took some flak for that one, probably deservedly so.