The following letters were received regarding David North's lecture, “Lessons from history: the 2000 elections and the new ‘irrepressible conflict'”
Dear Mr North,
I could not agree too strongly with every word of your lecture. I am impressed by the way you manage to explain so many issues—including the background of the Civil War—with such clarity.
I have felt for a long time that the recent years' events (say, from the impeachment on) were no normal political crisis. The election did make me think of Germany of 1933. However, I did console myself with the thought that there was no analogue of the presidential power which assisted Hitler in his “democratic” overthrow of the Weimar constitution.
I now see I was naive. What I did not reckon on was (1) the systematic opposition to voting in the first place by likely Democratic supporters coupled with discriminatory counting mechanisms which were also prejudiced against Democrats (2) the willingness of the Florida legislature—on very dubious if legally possible grounds—to elect Republican electors whatever happens and (3) the willingness of the US Supreme Court, if it happens, to produce an entirely political result which is in total opposition to the normal trend of the conservative members of the court—a decision which would be the Dred Scott of our time.
May I also share with you a small extract from an article in today's Guardian. This is the most liberal of the main English dailies and its general anti-Bush and anti-Republican line can be fully supported. But in a basically sensible article indicating how a Supreme Court decision for Bush would damage the Court, the author, Peter Preston, says:
“I may personally prefer some—not all—of Gore's policies, but the man himself is an uninspiring, wooden hulk. (Edna O'Brien calls him ‘The Wardrobe'). Bush, by contrast, may be intellectually punier, but he tells good jokes, clearly connects with middle America and has gathered some shrewd operators around him. This is a decent democratic choice, as usual: it is not the edge of some grand canyon.”
One can only despair at such frivolity. Further, even though personalities are not really the issue, I fail to see how anyone in any way progressive, cannot find Bush utterly loathsome, if only for his approach to executions.
Kindest regards
PH
11 December 2000
Congratulations to David North for his excellent and comprehensive analysis of the significance of the election fraud in Florida in his December 11, 2000 article. Your December 10, 2000 editorial was equally outstanding. I have notified various people in San Francisco of your editorial because it so clearly addressed the election fraud issue in Florida, and relates to the election fraud we have experienced here in San Francisco. I agree with David North that the Supreme Court's actions and the entire Florida debacle represent both a watershed in history and significant contradictions in our society. Unlike too many people who are socialists, I do not dismiss election fraud at all. I keep telling everyone that election fraud is fascism and an election fraud team is a strike-breaking team. It has nothing to do with whether we like the candidates on the ballot; the issue of election fraud is an issue of democratic rights, which socialists must always defend. Keep up the good work.
LH
11 December 2000
Dear Editors,
As usual, this was an excellent article. The WSWS has proven once again with its coverage of the attempted election swindle why I consider it the finest daily source of original news analysis going.
However, one thing must be pointed out, over the following passage by Mr. North:
“One columnist summed up all the cynicism toward democracy that prevails in the ruling circles: ‘Yes,' he wrote, ‘Gore probably got more votes, but who cares? Gore was mugged in Florida, but the local cops don't care.'”
The columnist was Hunter S. Thompson, and the cynicism he was describing was clearly meant to be ironic, if one reads the entire article (or reads the works of Thompson and understands his viewpoint). The fact that practically nobody cares about the theft of what pathetic crumbs of democracy we have is something that he most decidedly is disgusted over. Or, at least, he would be if he was sober.
Robert Sterling
Editor, The Konformist
11 December 2000
Dear Editor,
Thank you for this web site's consistently principled and accurate analysis of the unfolding political crisis in the US. The liberal media does not know what to make of these events, refusing to acknowledge that the emperor is indeed naked. The courage and integrity of people like North is heartening.
11 December 2000