The Winter of Our Discontent.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n\tRaimundo consid\u00e8re cet aspect r\u00e9volutionnaire de plusieurs points de vue.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
\t Le parti r\u00e9publicain. Pour Raimundo, le Super Thuesday<\/em> a montr\u00e9 la division extr\u00eame de ce parti, selon des lignes r\u00e9gionales qui s’identifient \u00e0 des tendances id\u00e9ologiques. Cette division est l’enseignement principal des \u00e9v\u00e9nements. Raimundo consid\u00e8re que les trois candidats principaux restant en lice s’identifient eux-m\u00eames \u00e0 ces trois tendances, alors que McCain n’a pas r\u00e9ussi \u00e0 vraiment conforter sa position de leader<\/em>. Le parti r\u00e9publicain devrait se trouver confront\u00e9 \u00e0 une tr\u00e8s difficile convention pour d\u00e9signer son candidat.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00abOn the Republican side, the fragmentation of the GOP continued apace, with the party apparently split along regional as well as ideological lines: McCain, while proclaiming himself the frontrunner, won on both coasts, Romney took the Midwest, and the Huckster conned the South into giving him the nod. One has to note the weakness of Romney, who did well in caucus states, and in those regions where he had a personal connection (Massachusetts and Utah). This represents the fragility of the old GOP establishment, which is backing Romney: like their candidate, they are out of ideas, and out of steam. The big story for the GOP is the persistence of Huckabee, whose surprising strength has knocked Romney flat on his back and pretty much out of the race. What’s significant, however, is that McCain has so far failed to close the deal, and the party convention is shaping up to be little short of chaos.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t Pour les d\u00e9mocrates, la situation est \u00e9galement tr\u00e8s difficile (du point de vue de l’establishment<\/em>), et Raimundo pr\u00e9voit \u00e9galement une convention particuli\u00e8rement agit\u00e9e, \u00e9galement \u00ablittle short of chaos<\/em>\u00bb, avec la possibilit\u00e9 d’un coup de l’establishment<\/em> pour imposer Hillary Clinton. Raimundo attribue la remarquable performance du s\u00e9nateur Obama \u00e0 ses positions sur la guerre en Irak. Pour lui, Obama est en train d’\u00eatre institu\u00e9 par son \u00e9lectorat comme le candidat anti-guerre. Du point de vue de Raimundo qui est que les Am\u00e9ricains veulent l’abandon de la politique ext\u00e9rieure belliciste de Bush, Obama est bien le candidat du changement.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00abThe same fate awaits the Democrats: it looks like the pledged delegates that is, delegates won fair and square in a primary are going in their majority to Obama, while the super-delegates party bigwigs appointed by the Powers-That-Be could give the nomination to Hillary. This could set up a situation where the party Establishment defies the apparent will of the voters and crowns Hillary in a super-delegate coup. One can almost feel the resentment, disappointment, and building anger that will rise up and smite the Democrats if and when this occurs. The whole process then becomes a metaphor for the cause of widespread voter alienation the rise of a permanently-entrenched political class in America, similar to that which once wielded power in the former Soviet Union.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbObama’s amazing rise is due almost entirely to his position on the war: he wants out by the end of ’08, and so do most Americans no matter which party they belong to. This is why his rhetoric about being a unifier is not all that far-fetched: the major appeal of change as a campaign theme, in this context, means first and foremost abandoning our foreign policy of perpetual war. During his speech last night, it was Obama’s lines about ending the war and bringing the troops home that brought the loudest sustained cheer: the crowd went wild.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t Enfin, il y a la possibilit\u00e9 du troisi\u00e8me parti, ou d’une candidature ind\u00e9pendante. Raimundo en vient \u00e9videmment \u00e0 Ron Paul, dont il est proche (Justin Raimundo est d’opinion libertarienne, comme Paul). Il observe que Ron Paul a \u00e9t\u00e9 et est largement barr\u00e9 dans le processus des primaires par les dispositions habituelles de la direction du parti. Mais il lui reste un r\u00f4le \u00e0 jouer, hors du parti r\u00e9publicain, qui est principalement de tuer la caricature de parti r\u00e9publicain qui a triomph\u00e9 ces huit derni\u00e8res ann\u00e9es. Raimundo fait partie de ceux qui pensent qu’une nomination de McCain entra\u00eenerait certainement une forte dissidence chez les r\u00e9publicains et une candidature ind\u00e9pendante.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
\t\u00abThink of it: Rush Limbaugh singing the 32 praises of Ron Paul. As the Libertarian-Constitution third party candidate challenging both McCain and Hillary (or Obama, if the improbable happens), Paul would garner support from conservatives who hate McCain as well as from antiwar voters on the left. David Frum thinks a third party movement led by Paul would take more votes from the Democrats than the Republicans, but if McCain is the nominee as looks increasingly likely: but, this year, you never know that scenario seems more like wishful thinking. A third party run by Paul could relegate the GOP to the political graveyard, where it would take its place alongside the Whigs, the Know-Nothings, and the Greenback Party. That alone quite aside from any other benefit to libertarianism and\/or the antiwar movement will have made the whole effort worth it.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n\tL’appr\u00e9ciation de Raimundo est radicale et elle sera appr\u00e9ci\u00e9e avec mesure \u00e0 cause de cela. Elle n’en est pas moins tr\u00e8s int\u00e9ressante par les orientations qu’elle sugg\u00e8re. Elle nous indique quelques tendances qui peuvent s’affirmer et donner \u00e0 la campagne une orientation effectivement r\u00e9volutionnaire (selon le sens am\u00e9ricaniste du terme). Le constat g\u00e9n\u00e9ral est qu’on voit s’affirmer de plus en plus une situation incontr\u00f4lable, tr\u00e8s fluide, o\u00f9 certaines dispositions prises par l’establishment<\/em> pour contr\u00f4ler le processus de d\u00e9signation, notamment le raccourcissement des primaires pour concentrer la puissance des favoris pro-establishment<\/em>, se retournent contre lui: \u00abDesigned by party bosses to ensure their hegemony and the hegemony of cash over the nominating process, the actual result of this enforced condensation has been increased volatility. This boomerang effect has thrown the alleged leaders of both parties into a tailspin, and it is a sight beautiful to behold. For once, the bad guys got their come-uppance! How sweet it is!<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
\tMis en ligne le 7 f\u00e9vrier 2008 \u00e0 09H12<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Apr\u00e8s le Super Tuesday, des analyses plus g\u00e9n\u00e9rales sur les tendances des \u00e9lections pr\u00e9sidentielles aux USA commencent \u00e0 appara\u00eetre. Justin Raimundo, aujourd’hui sur Antiwar.com, en donne une appr\u00e9ciation r\u00e9volutionnaire: \u00abThe Winter of Our Discontent.\u00bb Raimundo consid\u00e8re cet aspect r\u00e9volutionnaire de plusieurs points de vue. Le parti r\u00e9publicain. Pour Raimundo, le Super Thuesday a montr\u00e9 la… <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"neve_meta_sidebar":"","neve_meta_container":"","neve_meta_enable_content_width":"","neve_meta_content_width":0,"neve_meta_title_alignment":"","neve_meta_author_avatar":"","neve_post_elements_order":"","neve_meta_disable_header":"","neve_meta_disable_footer":"","neve_meta_disable_title":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[4118,6208,7412,7347,1383,2879],"class_list":["post-69661","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bloc-notes","tag-establishment","tag-obama","tag-paulsysteme","tag-primaires","tag-raimundo","tag-revolution"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/69661","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=69661"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/69661\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=69661"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=69661"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=69661"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}