 |
Fri Jul 25 2008 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
Departments Election Issues Electoral Politics and the War: Lessons from 2004 and What the Anti-War Movement Should do in 2006 by Kevin Zeese June 8, 2005 The following article is an interview with Joshua Frank, the author of "Left Out! How Liberals Helped Elect George W. Bush." The book is an analysis of the 2004 presidential campaign. Frank's writings appear regularly on the Internet and he is a contributor to "Dime’s Worth of Difference: Beyond the Lesser of Two Evils." In this interview we examine what the anti-war movement can learn from the 2004 presidential election and how the movement should be approaching the 2006 election. Kevin Zeese: First, tell me about your new book “Left Out!.” What did you learn about the 2004 campaign while writing it? Joshua Frank: I learned a lot from the 2004 elections and this book is my attempt to put it all together and make sense of what went down. In “Left Out!” I shovel through the muck of our current political arrangement, where progressives and those on the left are continually told that we have real options within the so-called two-party system. Many told us during the 2004 elections that George W. Bush was so darn bad that we had to, just had to, vote for John Kerry. There was no other choice. The polluted climate, as you well know, was “Anybody But Bush.” Or better put, “Nobody But Kerry.” Hatred of Bush drove the support for Kerry. We had buses to Ohio, we had DVD parties, and all were targeting Bush rather than trumpeting Kerry. That should have been sign number one that the Democrats were on the wrong path. The candidacies of Ralph Nader and even that of the Green Party’s David Cobb were seen as far too dangerous to support in the states that could have actually put pressure on Kerry (i.e. swing-states) to take on issues we believed in. The strategy, endorsed by so many respected activists and intellectuals on the left, including Noam Chomsky, Howard Zinn, Medea Benjamin, Norman Solomon, to name just a few - was all about expediting the process of removing Bush from office. Not issues. Their strategy was a miserable failure, however. The Democratic alternatives were grossly inadequate. The left asked absolutely nothing of Kerry and guess what? They got absolutely nothing in return. That’s what you get when you give someone’s candidacy unconditional support, despite the fact that the Democrats mirrored Bush on so many crucial issues - from the economy to civil liberties to trade to foreign policy to the environment. It was textbook lesser-evilism and it was a loser. The left had succumbed to the plague of ABB. Their unconditional support made Kerry worse and undermined everything the left supposedly stood for. And this is where I think we must be crystal clear as to what the costs of expedient choices are, even if the benefits seem predominant. As I argue in “Left Out!,” backing the lesser-evil, like the majority of liberals and lefties did in 2004, keeps the whole political pendulum in the US swinging to the right. It derails social movements, helps elect the opposition, and undermines democracy. This backwards logic allows the Democrats and Republicans to control the discourse of American politics and silences any voices that may be calling for genuine change. Despite all this, there are still many that are not convinced that the Democrats are virtually identical to their Republican counterparts. So to argue this point, I focus a bit on one Democrat whom many argue represents the liberal end of the respectable mainstream Democratic Party - and that’s DNC chairman Howard Dean. At this time Dean, along with Barak Obama, is thought to be a beacon of hope within the Democratic establishment. He wants to transform the Party. He wants to empower the grassroots. But there’s a catch, and that’s that Howard Dean really doesn’t disagree with his party’s own platform, which is virtually the same as the Republican’s. So his quest for change is not grounded in any ideological divergence. No Dean’s “new” path is a strategic one. He simply wants to corral all the progressives into the Democratic fold. He certainly doesn’t want them to leave the Party and go join up with some progressive third party. And that is really what Dean’s job is now: keep the party activists in-line while he cashes their checks. Take their money and don’t let them stray. Because when and if they ever do, real change could be possible. And lord knows that nobody in power out in Washington wants that to happen. They like business just the way it is. Zeese: What happened to the anti-war issue in 2004? We had developed a large base of activists, massive demonstrations, the war was going down hill - indeed all of our worst predictions were coming true during the presidential campaign -- yet the anti-war issue was not on the agenda during the presidential race. What happened? Frank: What happened was the anti-war movement supported a pro-war candidate, which not surprisingly, was an utter disaster. How can a movement back a candidate that supports everything it opposes? There is no question that during the campaign John Kerry was a relentless warmonger, as William Safire put it, Kerry was the newest neo-con who even out-hawked Bush. True enough. Most people that supported Kerry didn’t support his position on the Iraq war, which was shown by a USA Today poll taken during the Democratic convention in Boston. If you mentioned this paradox in mixed company during the campaign you were likely to hear all sorts of tepid excuses. Like, “oh, Kerry really isn’t for the war, he’s just being tactical,” or, “well, at least he’s not a neo-con, they are really dangerous ya know!” Or something ridiculous like that. All these excuses, despite the fact that Kerry during the 1990s supported the Iraq Liberation Act, which endorsed the military removal of Saddam Hussein. All this despite the fact that Kerry continues to support some of the most violent and grisly US military ventures in Colombia and elsewhere. This, despite the fact that Kerry’s key foreign policy advisor Richard Holbrooke, played a significant role in perhaps the largest US backed genocides of the last century - as Holbrooke helped supply Suharto’s bloody regime in Indonesia with bundles of illegal weapons. Apparently it didn’t matter at all to these supposed anti-war folks that Kerry stood shoulder to shoulder with President Bush claiming that Iraq had those pesky weapons of mass destruction hidden under its turbulent soil. None of this mattered in the least. Talk about the collapse of a movement. How can you stand for something and yet completely capitulate your ideals? The answer is simple: you can’t. Again, this gets back to the main point: you cannot support any candidate sans specific demands. You cannot profess to stand for issues you know to be just, and still surrender those stances and convictions at crunch time. It’s like training to run a marathon for a year or two and then getting inebriated right before the big race. All the training you did up to that point is now irrelevant. You’re bound to fail. And it’s safe to say the anti-war movement was drunk on ABB last year. All the good work they did up to that point was irrelevant. They should have stuck to their issues despite the alleged consequences - which turned out to be ill-founded anyway. Not only did the anti-war movement not elect the man they wanted, John F. Kerry, they in fact helped reelect the very man they wanted to defeat, George W. Bush - simply because they didn’t ask anything of the candidate they supported. Zeese: So what should the anti-war movement done during 2004? Frank: The anti-war movement should have backed a candidate that embraced their call to exit Iraq at once. They should have forced Kerry to take this position or risk losing their support. The best way they could have done that was to support a candidate that was willing to put pressure on Kerry in the states that mattered most to the Democrats. They should have supported Ralph Nader in swing-states, plain and simple. They should have told Kerry that he wouldn’t get their votes unless he took on their positions. Of course, some of us were saying this during the election, but few in the anti-war movement were listening. They thought that supporting Nader could tilt the election in favor of Bush. They were wrong. What they didn’t realize was that by curbing their own important anti-war convictions, they were making Kerry unaccountable. They were making Kerry worse than he already was. By not opposing his Iraq position, they helped tilt the election to Bush. Remember how Kerry just couldn’t get anything right? He was constantly in flux. That’s why more people were mobilized against Bush than for Kerry. If we learned anything from 2004, we should realize that hatred of an incumbent is not enough to elect a challenger. Had the anti-war movement mobilized behind an anti-war candidate, despite who he or she was, and despite the alleged consequences – Kerry would have felt tremendous pressure to differentiate himself from the Bush agenda, and particularly Bush’s position on Iraq. But Kerry couldn’t do it. Nobody was pressuring him. So he wavered, collapsed, and lost a monumental election. In the end it wasn’t just the election that was lost, the soul of the anti-war movement was lost too. Zeese: What do you think the anti-war movement should do in 2006 during the congressional elections? Frank: Well, the anti-war movement should do what they didn’t do in the 2004 elections: hold candidates feet to the fire. The body count in Bush’s illegitimate war on terror seems to be almost exponential at this point. Every month there are more deaths than the last. Each day the resistance fighters in Iraq seem to be gaining more and more control. There is no end to the occupation in sight. If candidates do not embrace the exiting of US led occupation forces at once, they must be opposed with the full-force of the anti-war movement (or what’s left of it). In certain cases this may mean running third party anti-war candidates against pro-war Democrats like Rep. Nancy Pelosi of California. It’s time for the antiwar movement to step up and oppose candidates who support Bush’s war agenda. And if the Democratic candidates continue to support Bush’s ghastly foreign policies, they must be defeated until they learn. We need to monkeywrench this issue. The anti-war movement must learn from the 2004 elections where so many activists and scholars caved in and supported Kerry, simply because they saw Bush as such an extreme threat to world peace. The threat isn’t Bush’s alone; both parties have a long bloody history of employing military aggression. We aren’t going to get what we want if we keep supporting candidates whose positions we oppose. We are only going to get what we want when we start voting for what we want. Email this article to a friend |
Don't forget to check out articles from 2007 and 2008
"An open letter to the Election Assistance Commission"
December 25, 2005
John Gideon, Executive Director of VotersUnite.Org and Information Manager for VoteTrustUSA.Org
"Diebold hack proven in county test!"
December 17, 2005
Glenn Yeagley
"Diebold Inc. in a tailspin after resignation of CEO and filing of a class action fraud lawsuit"
December 17, 2005
VelvetRevolution.us
"Orr thinks machines make voting simpler, more secure "
December 17, 2005
Mario Bartoletti
"Diebold "hack test" - Sec. State / Black Box Lawyer square off"
December 10, 2005
Black Box Voting
"With new legislation, Ohio Republicans plan holiday burial for American Democracy"
December 6, 2005
Bob Fitrakis & Harvey Wasserman
"Important daily voting news"
December 4, 2005
John Gideon
"Poll shock"
November 24, 2005
Robert C. Koehler, Tribune Media Services
"Ohio's Diebold Debacle: New machines call election results into question"
November 24, 2005
Bob Fitrakis & Harvey Wasserman
"Diebold attempts to evade election transparency laws"
November 20, 2005
Matt Zimmerman
"Supreme Court stabs another GOP knife into US democracy by upholding ex-felon vote ban"
November 16, 2005
Bob Fitrakis and Harvey Wasserman
"Has American Democracy died an electronic death in Ohio 2005's referenda defeats?"
November 11, 2005
Bob Fitrakis and Harvey Wasserman
"What John Kerry definitely said about 2004’s stolen election and why it's killing American democracy"
November 10, 2005
Bob Fitrakis & Harvey Wasserman
"Scrap the "secret" ballot - return to open voting"
November 5, 2005
Lynn Landes
"Clarification of NEDA's withdrawal of Ohio exit poll paper"
November 5, 2005
Kathy Dopp
"Clarification of NEDA's withdrawal of Ohio exit poll paper"
November 3, 2005
Kathy Dopp, National Election Data Archive
"Watergate-style money laundering indictments stoke Ohio's stolen election fires"
October 28, 2005
Bob Fitrakis & Harvey Wasserman
"Powerful Government Accountability Office report confirms key 2004 stolen election findings"
October 26, 2005
Bob Fitrakis & Harvey Wasserman
"Did you erase your own vote?"
October 25, 2005
Warren Stewart, Director of Legislative Issues and Policy, www.VoteTrustUSA.org
"Why can't the left face the Stolen Elections of 2004 & 2008?"
October 18, 2005
Bob Fitrakis and Harvey Wasserman
"Carter/Baker Report can't face how the GOP stole America's 2004 election & is rigging 2008"
September 20, 2005
Bob Fitrakis & Harvey Wasserman
"Two Steps Forward, One Step Back"
September 20, 2005
Warren Stewart, Director of Legislative Issues and Policy, VoteTrustUSA
"FEMA Chief Brown Paid Millions in False Claims to Help Bush Win Fla. Votes"
September 19, 2005
Jason Leopold
"Ohio recount lawsuit set for trial; election workers indicted"
September 4, 2005
Blair Bobier
"Ohio Governor's ethics violations expose money trail to stolen 2004 election"
August 30, 2005
Bob Fitrakis & Harvey Wasserman
"Diebold's failure in California"
August 7, 2005
John Gideon, Information Manager, www.VotersUnite.Org and www.VoteTrustUSA.Org
"Did the GOP steal another Ohio Election?"
August 5, 2005
Bob Fitrakis and Harvey Wasserman
"Conyers-Kaptur seek special counsel for Noe probe"
August 4, 2005
John Conyers, Jr. and Marcy Kaptur
"Dramatic new charges deepen link between Ohio's "Coingate," Voinovich mob connections, and the theft of the 2004 election"
July 29, 2005
Bob Fitrakis & Harvey Wasserman
"None dare call it stolen - Ohio, the election, and America's servile press"
July 24, 2005
Mark Crispin Miller, summarized by Mary Anne Saucier, Columbus, Ohio
"Civic Engagement and the Restoration of Community from a voter activist’s view"
July 19, 2005
Terri Zins
"My report from Hocking County, July 5, 2005: An update on Sherole Eaton's unfolding Story"
July 7, 2005
Victoria Parks, Ohio Backbone Campaign
"Handbook for Ohio Voter Activists, Version 2.0"
July 7, 2005
Various activists
"Direct testimony: Presented to Election Assessment Hearing"
July 4, 2005
Richard Hayes Phillips, Ph.D.
"Log Cabin Republicans in Ohio"
July 4, 2005
Richard Hayes Phillips, Ph.D.
"With a limp election theft report, Dems prove why they're unworthy"
June 28, 2005
Harvey Wasserman and Bob Fitrakis
"Voting problems and uncounted votes in Lucas County, Ohio"
June 28, 2005
Justine Smith
"The DNC 2004 Election Report: An indictment of incompetence"
June 25, 2005
Steven Rosenfeld and Bob Fitrakis
"Corporate control of the election process"
June 22, 2005
John Gideon
"Introduction: Did George W. Bush steal America's 2004 election?"
June 16, 2005
Bob Fitrakis, Steve Rosenfeld and Harvey Wasserman
"Voter Confidence Committee Calls For Rejection of CA Special Election"
June 16, 2005
Dave Berman
"Activists from 25 states lobby for paper ballots on June 9 and 10"
June 10, 2005
VoteTrustUSA.org
"Fear of riffraff"
June 10, 2005
Robert C. Koehler, Tribune Media Services
"Electoral Politics and the War: Lessons from 2004 and What the Anti-War Movement Should do in 2006"
June 8, 2005
Kevin Zeese
"Optical scan machines hacked in Florida"
June 2, 2005
Black Box Voting
"Does ES&S really want to sell the Automark machines?"
May 28, 2005
John Gideon
"Attack on election board whistleblower and leaked Blackwell threats re-fire Ohio's election theft scandal"
May 23, 2005
Bob Fitrakis and Harvey Wasserman
"Franklin County, Ohio Election Procedures – April and May 2005"
May 6, 2005
Paddy Shaffer
"Carter Gets It – But Will His Electoral Commission?"
April 24, 2005
Kevin Zeese and Linda Schade
"Voter Perceptions and Political Deceptions: Federal, Ohio and Knox"
April 24, 2005
Mike Swinford
"Electoral reform groups call for James Baker's resignation from electoral reform commission"
April 17, 2005
Ilene Proctor
"National Conference on Election Reform Opens with Civil Rights Panel"
April 13, 2005
Abigail Thorton
"View from Another Planet"
April 13, 2005
Josh Mitteldorf
"Democrats! Paper “Trails” Aren’t Good Enough. Count The Damn Ballots!"
April 12, 2005
Lynn Landes
"Democrats, Paper ‘Trails’ Aren’t Good Enough; Count The Damn Ballots!"
April 1, 2005
Lynn Landes, Online Journal Contributing Writer
"Scientific Analysis Suggests Presidential Vote Counts May Have Been Altered"
March 30, 2005
US Vote Counts
"As Blackwell Says, Ohio’s in 2004 was a National Model"
March 24, 2005
Steve Rosenfeld, Bob Fitrakis, and Harvey Wasserman
"Understanding the difference between paper ballots and paper audit trails"
March 20, 2005
Gary Beckwith
"Save Our Democracy"
March 16, 2005
John Irwin
"Republicans maneuvering to get Voting Rights Act killed"
March 10, 2005
Rev. Jesse L. Jackson, Sr.
"Legal filing highlights Blackwell's hypocrisy in Ohio recount case"
March 7, 2005
Blair Bobier
"Selma 40 Years Later"
March 6, 2005
Rev. Jesse L. Jackson, Sr.
"Exit Poll Madness - Analyst Steve Freeman & Company Offer False Choice"
March 4, 2005
Lynn Landes
"Libertarians To Testify in Ohio House: Modernize Ohio's Election Laws"
March 3, 2005
Robert Butler
"The New Voting Rights Movement Begins Here Today"
March 2, 2005
Steven Rosenfeld
"Voting in America"
February 28, 2005
Bob Babson
"The Mighty Texas Strike Force"
February 28, 2005
Nick Mottern - Documentary News Service
"Blackwell presidential election sanctions briefs"
February 22, 2005
Various individuals
"Representative Conyers and others file amicus brief in Ohio Supreme Court"
February 17, 2005
Dena Graziano
"Congresswoman Tubbs Jones Outraged at Blackwell's Failure to Appear During House Administration Hearing"
February 12, 2005
Office of Rep. Tubbs Jones
"Ohio Attorney-General's attack on election protection attorneys draws mountain of documentation on state's stolen election, including new study on exit polls"
February 3, 2005
Steve Rosenfeld and Harvey Wasserman
"Prominent Statisticians Refute 'Explanation' of 2004 U.S. Exit Poll Discrepancies in New Edison/Mitofsky Report and Urge Investigation of U.S. Presidential Election Results"
January 31, 2005
Bruce O'Dell
"The last man to concede..."
January 29, 2005
Sheila Samples
"Report on Washington DC, January 6, 2005"
January 25, 2005
Avram Friedman
"Arkansas in 2004: Did Bush Really Win?"
January 24, 2005
Max Standridge
"New links"
January 23, 2005
Free Press staff
"Voting Problems and Uncounted Votes in Lucas County, Ohio"
January 23, 2005
Justine Smith
"Plan B: Parallel Elections & Signed Ballots"
January 20, 2005
Lynn Landes
"Open Letter to Ohio Attorney General Jim Petro from Representative John Conyers, Jr."
January 20, 2005
Representative John Conyers, Jr.
"Open Letter to Warren Mitofsky and Larry Rosin from Representative John Conyers, Jr."
January 20, 2005
Representative John Conyers, Jr.
"Ohio's GOP Attorney General launches revenge attack on Election Protection legal team"
January 19, 2005
Steve Rosenfeld and Harvey Wasserman
"What are they hiding in New Mexico?"
January 18, 2005
Warren Stewart, National Ballot Integrity Project
"In the Shadow of Dr. King, counting the vote remains a civil rights issue"
January 17, 2005
Bob Fitrakis, Steve Rosenfeld and Harvey Wasserman
"Did the “Liberal Media” Get the 2004 Election All Wrong?
"
January 16, 2005
Gene C. Gerard
"'COUNT EVERY VOTE. EVERY VOTE COUNTS'"
January 16, 2005
Mary Anne Saucier
"Moss v. Bush moves on and movement continues"
January 13, 2005
Bob Fitrakis, Steve Rosenfeld and Harvey Wasserman
"Rally Continues Drive for Democracy"
January 9, 2005
Mark Huntress
"Estimated vote count in Ohio"
January 8, 2005
Richard Hayes Phillips, Ph.D.
"January 6 Washington, D.C. rally report"
January 8, 2005
Nick Mottern
"Together, we moved three mountains"
January 8, 2005
Bob Fitrakis, Steve Rosenfeld and Harvey Wasserman
"What the election challenge means"
January 8, 2005
David Swanson, ILCA
"Progressive Democrats lead historic voting rights protest as Congress ratifies flawed 2004 Electoral College tally"
January 7, 2005
Bob Fitrakis, Steve Rosenfeld and Harvey Wasserman
"Arnebeck letter to Congress re Presidential Electoral Challenge"
January 6, 2005
Clifford O. Arnebeck, Jr.
"Senator Barbara Boxer, D-CA and Representative Stephanie Tubbs Jones, D-OH contested the election"
January 6, 2005
Free Press staff
"The "Crime of November 2": The human side of how Bush stole Ohio, and why Congress must investigate rather than ratify the Electoral College (Part Two of Two)"
January 5, 2005
Bob Fitrakis, Steve Rosenfeld and Harvey Wasserman
"Status Report of the House Judiciary Committee Democratic Staff"
January 5, 2005
U.S. Rep. John Conyers and staff
"Seven key reasons why the vote must be challenged at the electoral college"
January 3, 2005
Rev. Jesse Jackson, Rainbow/PUSH Coalition
"Ten preliminary reasons why the Bush vote does not compute, and why Congress must investigate rather than certify the Electoral College (Part One of Two)"
January 3, 2005
Bob Fitrakis, Steve Rosenfeld and Harvey Wasserman
"Verified election contest petitions and documents in Ohio Supreme Court "
January 2, 2005
The undersigned
"Distribution of voting machines by county in Ohio"
January 1, 2005
Andy Shifflette
"Did We Bounce An Election?"
January 1, 2005
Warren Stewart, votersunite.org
"Presidential election congressional hearing transcript"
January 1, 2005
Congresspeople Waters, Tubbs-Jones and Conyers and others
Selected articles from 2004
"Ohio's official non-recount ends amidst new evidence of fraud, theft and judicial contempt mirrored in New Mexico"
December 31, 2004
"Impossible Phantom Votes in New Mexico
"
December 30, 2004
"The 2004 Presidential Election: Who Won The Popular Vote? An Examination of the Comparative Validity of Exit Poll and Vote Count Data"
December 29, 2004
"Ohio GOP election officials ducking notices of deposition as Kerry enters stolen vote fray"
December 28, 2004
"Another third rate burglary"
December 25, 2004
"Hacking the vote in Miami County"
December 25, 2004
"Update from the Ohio Frontlines"
December 24, 2004
"Lawsuit Before the Ohio Supreme Court"
December 24, 2004
"Kerry votes switched to Bush and ballots pre-punched for Bush"
December 24, 2004
"Uncounted votes in Cuyahoga County"
December 24, 2004
"GAO report documents how easy it is to hack the vote"
November 15, 2005
"J30 Election Reform Coalition"
March 21, 2005
"The Un-mighty New Hampshire Jam Force"
March 21, 2005
"Petro sanctions democracy"
March 21, 2005
"Progressives helped concede election by conceding the moral high ground"
March 21, 2005
"We will not concede, or get over it, but we shall overcome"
January 23, 2005
"From Selma to Palm Beach to Columbus"
January 23, 2005
"Movement Heroes"
January 23, 2005
Read Articles by Year:
2007 2006 2005 2004
2003 2002 2001 2000
All content © 1970-2008
The Columbus Free Press
Disclaimer