That might be the horrific choice on offer next year in the American presidential elections, the worst of the Democratic candidates versus the nutties of the Republicans. Not a very inspiring choice, not that there’s any Democratic candidate much better, or any Republican less worse. I well understand why so many Americans don’t vote anymore, as it changes nothing.
Nothing, I hear you say, but what about the War on Iraq, or the Supreme Court, or Healtcare, or… And sure, you’re right, having a Democratic president, even one as awful as Hillary would be slightly etter than yet another Republican nutjob. With Hillary in the White House, the ongoing war against the poor would be covered up somewhat, more people would get slightly less poor, the structural racism and sexism in American society would be lifted somewhat and there would be slightly less and slightly less insane foreign military adventures on offer.
But that’s all. Hillary won’t give up the god-given right of the United States to meddle in other countries affairs, nor will she do anything that will offend big business too much. At best she will provide a breathing space, four or eight years in which the battered US middle classes can recover somewhat, the military can get itself back into shape after Iraq and Afghanistan and things can go back to normal. Which is better than what Rudy would offer, more craziness, but not much better.
To me, the upcoming elections feel somewhat like a rerun of 2004, with a rightwing Democrat against a loony rightwing Republican; the big change is that this time, the Democrat will probably win. But it’s hard to get excited about this, as it seems that four more years of war and disaster hasn’t lead to a more radical alternative. Ghu knowns I’m not hoping for a socialist, but at the very least an actual liberal, somebody who has not bought into the War on Terror, would’ve been nice.