Democrats squabble but offer no solution to war and economic crisis

[IndianaGreen]

Democrats squabble but offer no solution to war and economic crisis

By Patrick Martin
23 January 2008

Clinton, Obama and Edwards, like all the capitalist politicians in the Democratic and Republican parties, are representatives of the corporate elite. They have worked for big business, advocated policies favored by big business, and, from time to time, served as direct shills for big business.

But a “debate” along these lines is a political diversion, and the massive media coverage given to these charges and countercharges serves to degrade public consciousness and cover up the fundamental class nature of both the Democratic and Republican parties. Both parties defend the interests of the financial elite and, above all, its monopoly of economic, social and political power against the working class, regardless of their relations with this or that individual capitalist.

This class unity was expressed in the debate, as it has been consistently in the Democratic campaign, in the positions of the three candidates on the war in Iraq. All three praised the performance of the US military, while criticizing the performance of the White House. None suggested that the invasion and conquest of Iraq was an act of aggression or a violation of international law. All vowed to use American troops in Iraq as necessary to defend American interests, without reference to the right of the people of Iraq to be free of foreign occupation and control. None mentioned the real concerns underlying the invasion—Iraq’s vast oil resources and key strategic position in the center of world oil production.

Here again, the unwillingness of Obama to raise or criticize the votes cast by Clinton and Edwards for the war in 2002 must be understand as a calculated strategic decision. Even as both Clinton and Edwards criticized him for one or another of hundreds of votes on obscure amendments in the Illinois state legislature, Obama refrained from citing the most important vote of both Clinton’s and Edwards’ political careers: authorizing Bush to invade and occupy Iraq.

While claiming in this debate to advocate a more ambitious political program than Clinton, including the achievement of a “60 percent majority,” Obama clearly does not want to do so by making an appeal to the vast majority of the American people who support an immediate end to the war. He does not want to be the “antiwar” candidate, not because this would be damaging in the election, but because it could arouse popular expectations that no Democratic or Republican administration could actually satisfy.

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/jan2008/dems-j23.shtml

[AnnieBW]

1. Well, Clinton and Obama do

Edwards is the only one that's actually trying to HELP people.

[Jim Sagle]

2. Yeah, but the Trotskyite dumbfucks at wsws would never acknowledge that.

They never heard of an American they didn't hate.

[demo dutch]

3. I completely agree, right now the Dems look ridiculous with the bickering and

it is not going to help us getting elected to WH