The 2004 US Presidential elections occur in a time of two prolonged imperial wars (Iraq and Afghanistan), two colonial occupations (Palestine and Haiti) by US allies (Israel) and clients (Brazil). Within the US there is growing opposition to the war and rising costs of health, education, housing and pharmaceuticals. A majority of the electorate is […]
The 2004 US Presidential elections occur in a time of two prolonged imperial wars (Iraq and Afghanistan), two colonial occupations (Palestine and Haiti) by US allies (Israel) and clients (Brazil). Within the US there is growing opposition to the war and rising costs of health, education, housing and pharmaceuticals.
A majority of the electorate is opposed to Bush’s policies on both the imperial wars (because of the US casualties and the economic cost), his lies, deception and incompetence. Yet the Democratic Party candidate, John Kerry has failed to take the lead in the polls!
While there is growing animosity to Bush, there is no great sympathy for Kerry. In fact there is a great deal of mass apathy toward the elections in less than 90 days. Experts estimate that at least 50% of the potential electorate will not even bother to vote, many of these non-voters are poor urban and rural blacks and Hispanics as well as white workers who do not see either of the two candidates speaking to their interests.
Both Bush and Kerry support the Iraq and Afghanistan invasions. The Democrat Kerry promises to increase the number of US soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan by 40,000 and to increase the military budget beyond the $400 billion that Bush is spending. Kerry has promised «unconditional support to Israel and Sharon» and attacked the United Nations General Assembly which voted 150 to 6 against Israel’s wall. Kerry supports greater military intervention in Latin America. He criticized Bush for not intervening more forcefully to support the bankrupt De la Rua regime in Argentina and the corrupt Sanchez de Losada in Bolivia. In other words, Kerry would have sent the marines into Buenos Aires and La Paz to drown the popular revolts in blood! Kerry supports Cuban American extremists in Miami and the anti-Chavez coup leaders in Venezuela.
In summary Kerry is even more militarist and interventionist than our current right wing extremist President Bush. Is it any wonder that many people will stay home on Election Day?
The main difference between the two candidates is that Kerry proposes to «consult» with «allies» and intervene «multi-laterally» to secure US imperial domination. Kerry proposes to follow Bush’s intervention in Haiti. «Consult» with France and Canada – to ensure imperial coordination. Arm and finance Haitian paramilitary terrorists to invade the country. Send in the US marines to kidnap and expel the elected President. Secure the backing of puppets Kofi Annam (UN Secretary General) and Cesar Gavira of the OAS. Then recruit Latin American client regimes (Brazil, Chile etc..) to provide the military to protect the US puppet regime – thus providing the appearance of a «multi-lateral» action. In other words Kerry will work closer with Latin American client regimes («multi-lateralism») to impose ALCA, extend militarization and to overthrow independent democratic and nationalist regimes. Kerry, like Bush, looks to Lagos in Chile, Lula in Brazil, Toledo in Peru, Gutierrez in Ecuador, Fox in Mexico and Uribe in Colombia for support in securing US control of Latin America. We can expect Kerry to deepen the neo-liberal policies in Latin America while protecting certain US producers – textiles, orange juice, steel and so on. Kerry will increase US military spending for Plan Colombia and pressure Latin America’s relation with Cuba and Venezuela.
Unfortunately, many US «progressives» like Michael Moore, the celebrated film maker, are so blinded by their justifiable hostility to Bush-style imperialism that they have adopted the slogan «anyone but Bush» – thus supporting Kerry, even though he is promising to extend and deepen imperial war policies. The progressive alternative to Bush and Kerry is the independent Reform Party candidates Ralph Nader and Peter Camejo. They have provided a systematic and principled opposition to all imperialist wars and colonial occupations from Afghanistan to Iraq to Palestine to Haiti. They propose a national universal health program, a doubling of the minimum wage and oppose ALCA and Plan Colombia. Unfortunately the mass media exclude them from public view. The Democrats engage in every illicit and legal maneuver to prevent Nader/Camejo from appearing on the ballot for fear they will attract progressive workers dissatisfied with millionaire Kerry’s neo-liberal-militarist policies.
The majority of black political leaders embedded in the Democratic Party have no mass base – over sixty percent of African-Americans will not bother to vote. The trade union confederation AFL-CIO is run by millionaire bureaucrats who represent only 9% of the private sector workforce – and they will spend over $30 million dollars for Kerry and get nothing in return for their members.
For those activists and organizers not lined up at the trough of the Democratic Party, the only road is to organize protests, organize class movements and move to create a new mass third party. The outcome of the Presidential elections will bring no hope for peace and justice in Latin America. Only the anti-imperialist and socio-political movement can accomplish those tasks.
July 27, 2004