Larry Johnson and Susan UnPC: McCarthyists

This is Part I of what will be a two part Diary. Part II will be posted sometime tomorrow. Part I discusses McCarthyism, its role in American politics and explains why Obama is not a Marxist or any kind of leftist. Part II tomorrow will focus on the McCarthyist campaign of Larry Johnson and Susan UnPC against Obama.

In 1950, a relatively unknown (aside for his reputation of disregarding Senate rules) Senator from Wisconsin named Joe McCarthy made the following claim in a speech to the Women's Republican Club of Wheeling West Virginia:

"While I cannot take the time to name all the men in the State Department who have been named as members of the Communist Party and members of a spy ring, I have here in my hand a list of 205."

McCarthy's name later became synonymous with the practice of discrediting people who voiced criticism of capitalism or the U.S. by making unsubstantiated allegations of being a "communist."

During the Cold War (and apparently still) McCarthyism played an important function in American politics. It provided a way to inhibit substantive discussion of many issues. Some of the people called commmunists or Marxists were, in fact, Communists or Marxists. Many were not.

Many of those  Marxists, however such as Howard Sherman  were sharply critical of the Soviet Union. Having met and corresponded with Howard Sherman, I am proud to say that I consider his views to be among those that are definitely worthy of substantive discussion and consideration.

In the 1960's many progressive activists of various stripes were constantly accused of being "communists." Both Martin Luther King Jr. and the entire Civil Rights movement were often constantly accused of being communists, of "fomenting subversion", or just simply of "stirring up racial animosity."

And being accused of being "soft on communism", or it's 1980's equivalent of "blame America First" was often deemed morally equivalent to being a "communist sympathizer." This strategy has ironically been echoed in the 2000's, as notable critics of U.S. foreign policy such as Noam Chomsky have been dismissed for pointing out the obvious: U.S. pursuit of hegemony comes at not only a moral cost, it also comes at a political cost. Those of us, who for example, not only question the wisdom of the current U.S. war in Iraq, but the whole underlying logic and rationale for a "war on terror" have consistently seen our voices and our contributions deemed as beyond the pale. Candidate Hillary Clinton made it clear that her campaign would have no truck with those who did not buy into the global strategy in support of U.S. hegemony. And while many second wave feminists lined up behind Hillary's politics of gender identity, white privilege and demagoguery, at least some feminists such as Barbara Ehrenreich saw through it.

Those of us "on the left" (and I tentatively include myself in this category with some reservations) do not support Obama because he is a leftist. In fact, to the contrary. His politics are the politics of vital center liberalism. His foreign policy is one which calls for a wiser and more humane continuation of U.S. hegemony and the War on Terror. He has invested no political capital in promoting single payer health insurance. And needless to say, I have yet to hear Obama advocate nationalizing anything-let alone moving the U.S. to a socialist economy. I support Obama, with some misgivings, because given all the givens, he is the best candidate available and Hillary Clinton ran a campaign designed to insure, in essence, that ideas that are to her left would get no hearing in American politics.

Obama does have in his past, some associations with people who have to some degree given serious credence to some Marxist ideas. But there is no evidence Obama has ever embraced these ideas.

Jeremiah Wright's melding of Black Liberation theology and Afro-Centrism, does of course have some roots in Marxism.** But it is ultimately, a bastardization, trapped in the narrowness of identity politics. Obama has never embraced "black liberation theology". Ayers, the former weather underground member is I would argue, no Marxist-but rather was at least at one point a practitioner of an infantile left wing disorder. While Obama knows Ayers, he has never embraced Ayers infantile brand of left wing politics.

The most radical thing Obama appears to have done in his life is to organize against Asbestos.

How does a politician who runs on a platform of maintaining U.S. hegemony, pursuing the War on Terror, using unilateral force in Pakistan, opposing any censure of Israel or fair consideration of the Palestinians, does not advocate single payer health insurance and whose Presidency will no doubt-as did that of Bill Clinton-maintain U.S. committment to free trade (perhaps with a few cosmetic changes) get branded as a "Marxist"?