Moody Center
American Nightmare
RECEIVED Fri., June 17, 2016
Dear Editor,
While Louis Black’s analysis is well-meaning [“Page Two: All or Nothing Is No Way Forward,” June 17], it is in the end the kind of “fall-in-line” establishment rhetoric that Sanders and left activists struggle against. It is a kind of intellectual bullying to say that those who supported Nader, or those who would support Bernie in a possible three-way race, are handing the race to Trump. This tactic has been much used to cow dissident voters who would divide the party. Ultimately, this betrays the inherent problems of our two-party system and further solidifies this unchanging dichotomy. Undoubtedly this election cycle has exposed a polarization in American politics, but that has less to do with candidates than with the extreme economic divide that resulted after the Wall Street fabricated housing bubble, which has had profound effects on our society, economically and psychically. As Black indicates, it has driven some to the left to meet with their cohorts on the far right, in a strange and disturbing union. He wonders why the right has attacked Clinton so hard, yet it seems strange he wouldn’t see through the cat-and-mouse show of American politics. The political elite differ on hot-button issues (viz., abortion, LGBT rights, taxes, immigration) that secure votes, but really effectuate policy around private interests. In fact, Republicans and Democrats often cooperate, and if elected Clinton will continue the policies of her predecessors: Under Obama, drone strikes have increased; we are engaged in a proxy war in Syria; zero gun control; zero Wall Street regulation; internment camps for undocumented workers; corporate personhood; the failed war on drugs; 22% of the population is incarcerated and private prisons flourish. No single president can legislate alone, as Black rightly points out; our modern American nightmare is the result of cooperative legislation between Democrats, Republicans, and the private interests that lobby them.
While Louis Black’s analysis is well-meaning [“Page Two: All or Nothing Is No Way Forward,” June 17], it is in the end the kind of “fall-in-line” establishment rhetoric that Sanders and left activists struggle against. It is a kind of intellectual bullying to say that those who supported Nader, or those who would support Bernie in a possible three-way race, are handing the race to Trump. This tactic has been much used to cow dissident voters who would divide the party. Ultimately, this betrays the inherent problems of our two-party system and further solidifies this unchanging dichotomy. Undoubtedly this election cycle has exposed a polarization in American politics, but that has less to do with candidates than with the extreme economic divide that resulted after the Wall Street fabricated housing bubble, which has had profound effects on our society, economically and psychically. As Black indicates, it has driven some to the left to meet with their cohorts on the far right, in a strange and disturbing union. He wonders why the right has attacked Clinton so hard, yet it seems strange he wouldn’t see through the cat-and-mouse show of American politics. The political elite differ on hot-button issues (viz., abortion, LGBT rights, taxes, immigration) that secure votes, but really effectuate policy around private interests. In fact, Republicans and Democrats often cooperate, and if elected Clinton will continue the policies of her predecessors: Under Obama, drone strikes have increased; we are engaged in a proxy war in Syria; zero gun control; zero Wall Street regulation; internment camps for undocumented workers; corporate personhood; the failed war on drugs; 22% of the population is incarcerated and private prisons flourish. No single president can legislate alone, as Black rightly points out; our modern American nightmare is the result of cooperative legislation between Democrats, Republicans, and the private interests that lobby them.
Brett Thompson
[Louis Black responds: While Thompson's analysis is well meaning, ultimately he reinforces my point, that there is a chance for all kinds of noble reasons people wrapped up in progressive politics may hand the election to Trump as the Naderites did to Bush. Though he accuses me of trying to cow dissidents, he argues that valuing his perception is more important than who is elected president. I don't agree.]
