Press enter after choosing selection


Letters image
Parent Issue
Creative Commons (Attribution, Non-Commercial, Share-alike)
Rights Held By
Agenda Publications
OCR Text

AGENDA is interested in receiving letters trom readers. Please keep them short and include your name and phone number (not tor publication). Send letters to: AGENDA, 220 S. Main St, Ann Arbor, Ml 48104. AGENDA Sold Out to Democrats I was greatly disappointed that n the November issue, AGENDA once again endorsed Democratie Party candidates across the board. While I would expect such endorsementsfrom the Detroit Free Press, I had assumed that AGENDA'S editorial positions would be different than those of a mainstream (corporate) liberal newspaper. AGENDA'S reasoning for not endorsing any third party candidates - that the editors were not particularly impressed with any of them and did not endorse any of their agendas overall - may be valid. But doesn't this apply equally to most, if not all, Democratie Party Candidates? Were you "particularly impressed" by Bob Carr or Frank Kelly, two candidates you endorsed? Does AGENDA subscribe overall to Bill Clinton's agenda? Looking solely at party platforms, I would have hoped that AGENDA would have found more in common with Workers World Party candidates than with most Democrats. Rather than stemming the tide of "cynicism, confusiĆ³n, and hopelessness," AGENDA merely continued down a path that will actually result in more conservative politicians, both Democratie and Republican. As long as leftists continue to feel compelled to vote Democratie, there will never be any viable progressive artemative to corporate liberal politics as usual. Even assuming the Democratie Party is redeemable, adebatable proposition at best, why should a Democratie politician feel obliged to support progressive policies, knowing that the left will always vote for him or her as the lesser of two evils? The aftermath of this November's elections only confirms this: Bill Clinton is now heading "to the middle" (read: more to the right), attempting to attract the "middle class white vote" (read: the racist white vote) by trumpeting welfare reform and the like. If progressives did not feel compelled to support the Democrats, regardless of the candidate, Clinton might have thought twice before continuing on this course. And even if he hadn't, at least those of us who do wish to see radical change could be building toward a possibly viable candidate that could challenge the Democrats from the left. Why should progressives vote for candidates they don 't want? The problem with voting for the lesser of two evils is that you may get what you voted for.


Old News