[Marxism] Fwd: Here Are 5 Takeaways From The Harper's Anti-Clinton Story

[Louis Proyect]

Doug Henwood has a major article in the latest Harper's on Hilary
Clinton, which is behind a paywall. I'd advise one and all, at least if
you are in the USA, to pick it up at the newsstand and even consider
taking out a sub. I have been a Harper's subscriber since the early 80s
and really value it, warts and all. It has the guts to take on the
Democrats, something that the Nation is loath to do. Short of buying the
issue, this summary of Doug's article is useful:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/19/hillary-clinton-2016_n_6011954.html

[Ralph Johansen]

Louis Proyect wrote

Doug Henwood has a major article in the latest Harper's on Hilary
Clinton, which is behind a paywall. I'd advise one and all, at least if
you are in the USA, to pick it up at the newsstand and even consider
taking out a sub. I have been a Harper's subscriber since the early 80s
and really value it, warts and all. It has the guts to take on the
Democrats, something that the Nation is loath to do. Short of buying the
issue, this summary of Doug's article is useful:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/19/hillary-clinton-2016_n_6011954.html
------------------------------------------------------------------------

From this Huffington summary, I would say that yes, it's good to have
at least that much of the story, and it's good Henwood was able to get
it out there. But it's a hit piece about the personal development of one
of the power hungry. What is really needed is a succinct analysis, using
method and tools that Marx bequeathed, presented in a format and story
line that anyone would have to agree with, as to why "it's hard to find
any political substance," and as to why we get Clintons and Bushes and
Obamas and dynasties, and why she typifies a "pragmatic politician
motivated more by ambition than by principle." That sort of Marxist
analysis can be accessed online with some effort, but Harper's "liberal"
readership, like my friends in the light left "middle class" who hold
the balance of electoral sufferance, certainly isn't getting it from the
sources to which they subscribe. So they end up throwing up their hands
and in the towel. And go and vote again for the lesser evil. Or not. And
then there's the question calling for explanation as to why anyone would
any longer, with all the palpable evidence available after the
disillusionment in Obama's performance, still believe in that system of
parliamentary obfuscation, and every-four-year first past the post
bourgeois-created and prevailing-power-serving ritual.


---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

[Marv Gandall]

Post by Louis Proyect
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/19/hillary-clinton-2016_n_6011954.html
------------------------------------------------------------------------
From this Huffington summary, I would say that yes, it's good to have at least that much of the story, and it's good Henwood was able to get it out there. But it's a hit piece about the personal development of one of the power hungry.

It's precisely the type of criticism a large part of the liberal base of the party directed against Clinton in 2008 which deprived her of the nomination. Doug's article will provide useful talking points for the same constituency which now wants to see her coronation blocked by Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders. I don't think a similar article attacking Warren or Sanders would be greeted with the same acclaim in these circles as the Clinton piece is likely to receive, assuming liberal publications like Harper's and Huffington Post would be willing to publish it, of course.

[Mark Lause]

Are Warren or Sanders any more likely to be viable Democratic contenders
than I am?
On Oct 20, 2014 2:29 PM, "Marv Gandall via Marxism" <

******************** POSTING RULES & NOTES ********************
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*****************************************************************

On Oct 20, 2014, at 2:04 PM, Ralph Johansen via Marxism <
Doug Henwood has a major article in the latest Harper's on Hilary

Clinton, which is behind a paywall. I'd advise one and all, at least if you
are in the USA, to pick it up at the newsstand and even consider taking out
a sub. I have been a Harper's subscriber since the early 80s and really
value it, warts and all. It has the guts to take on the Democrats,
something that the Nation is loath to do. Short of buying the issue, this
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/19/hillary-clinton-2016_n_6011954.html

------------------------------------------------------------------------
From this Huffington summary, I would say that yes, it's good to have at

least that much of the story, and it's good Henwood was able to get it out
there. But it's a hit piece about the personal development of one of the
power hungry.
It's precisely the type of criticism a large part of the liberal base of
the party directed against Clinton in 2008 which deprived her of the
nomination. Doug's article will provide useful talking points for the same
constituency which now wants to see her coronation blocked by Elizabeth
Warren or Bernie Sanders. I don't think a similar article attacking Warren
or Sanders would be greeted with the same acclaim in these circles as the
Clinton piece is likely to receive, assuming liberal publications like
Harper's and Huffington Post would be willing to publish it, of course.
_________________________________________________________
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/markalause%40gmail.com