Dan Koenig writes:
> I'm trying to desist but I can't!  Martin, in the 1960s many
> leftists made the eexact same argument that you are making.  They
> suggested, for example, that Governor Ronald Reagan's political
> career should be facilitated rather than opposed so that a huge
> public backlash against his excesses would develop.  The rest, as
> they say, is history.  Sure, eventually such hegemonies will
> collapse . . . . . . as will the universe.  I would rather see
> change sooner than later.  Dan

It's not the same argument, Dan.  It would be the same argument if I
argued that western-style capitalism and democracy should be
facilitated so that a huge public backlash against its excesses can
develop.  I'm not arguing that.  The excesses of capitalism should be
opposed now.  The spreading of capitalism and democracy throughout the
world should not be opposed.  When the spread is complete, and it
doesn't seem far off to me, there won't be a huge public backlash.  It
will be more like everybody saying in unison, "This isn't working and
the only reason left is that it doesn't work." Until that state is
reached, they can always blame it on the enemy.  If there is a huge
public backlash, that will be the enemy.  If you think you can make
the backlash big enougn, you *can* win.  But I think the cost in
suffering will be even greater in that case than in the case where
capitalism and democracy finish their spread quickly.  Also, in the
best case, proceeding apace with the spread of capitalism and
democracy, and using activism to force solutions to the problems that
it causes, might actually lead to the desired solution.

martin