The Bishop and the Butterfly: Murder, Politics, and the End of the Jazz Age
    oleeb's picture

    Gore Vidal And The Two Right Wings

    Bill Maher interviewed the incomparable Gore Vidal this past week on his show on HBO.  Vidal's wit and brilliance are still there despite his advancing age and obvious physical infirmities (he was in a wheelchair).  Seeing this great man for the first time in a while I decided to do a little surfing on the net and found a great quote from Vidal from the 70's that I wanted to share with others here because I think it is something people need to keep in mind. 

    We've heard from many in the past couple of years (but especially since the 08 election) who are hoping against hope that the Democrats will come to the rescue of our country at this moment of peril on many fronts and after the long years of the Bush tyranny.  While almost all of us agree that the leadership of Democrats is better than what we've had, Gore's quote reminds us that it is only marginally so unlless the people demand that the Democrats respond to us.  If we are to achieve the sort of changes necessary to get our country back on track, it will require all of us pushing and demanding that the Democrats do what is necessary.  They will not do it on their own or because it is the right thing to do.  Anyone who thinks that would have to be daft.  As Gore makes clear in the quote, they will only do it when forced.

    Given the government's several trillion dollar bipartisan welfare program for the banks and Wall Street the quote is particularly apt today.

    "There is only one party in the United States, the Property Party...and it has two right wings: Republican and Democrat. Republicans are a bit stupider, more rigid, more doctrinaire in their laissez-faire capitalism than the Democrats, who are cuter, prettier, a bit more corrupt--until recently... and more willing than the Republicans to make small adjustments when the poor, the black, the anti-imperialists get out of hand. But, essentially, there is no difference between the two parties."

    Comments

    I'm still laughing about Bill's question of would he be Gay if he lived in the times of the Romans. And Vidal's response "I could give you some tips on how to get through it".


    That was a good one!


    I have adored Gore for over 30 years now - even since I read The City and the Pillar. His knowledge of history and literature is encyclopedic. And his wit is razor-sharp and laser-honed.

    Good to see Bill obviously loving every moment spent interviewing someone he obviously feel is his superior - and the bantering and give-and-take of two truly intelligent men discussion issues of import.

    And the line about giving Bill 'tips on how to get through it' was classic!!!!!


    Former Republican Congressman, Susan Molinari, as a substitute host for Larry King, once interviewed Vidal. As she began the inteview, it became apparent that Molinari had never before heard the name, Gore Vidal. Her scowls came quickly, however, and she finished the interview with a very strong distaste for man.


    While almost all of us agree that the leadership of Democrats is better than what we've had, Gore's quote reminds us that it is only marginally so unless the people demand that the Democrats respond to us. oleeb

    Essentially to anyone not still drunk from the Inaugural buzz, the Obama Administration’s claim to fame so far is ‘hey we’re slightly less whacked than those other guys’. Change yes, but less than meets the eye. The Stiftung

    Vidal shouldn't be stealing from the beats.
    Lawrence Ferlinghetti's "Bird With Two Right Wings"


    Gore Vidal is one of a kind.

    Cousin to al gore.


    But, when you do see him it only proves how controlled the media is in this country.


    Maher, a pseudo intellectual at least tries.


    Sure is starting to look like one party. This (just the intro) from Glen Greenwald at Salon.com yesterday:

    "In the last week alone, the Obama DOJ (a) attempted to shield Bush's illegal spying programs from judicial review by (yet again) invoking the very "state secrets" argument that Democrats spent years condemning and by inventing a brand new "sovereign immunity" claim that not even the Bush administration espoused...These were merely the latest -- and among the most disturbing -- in a string of episodes in which the Obama administration has explicitly claimed to possess the very presidential powers that Bush critics spent years condemning as radical, lawless and authoritarian."


    All of which tells us quite a bit about Susan Molinari.


    Indeed.

    There's a good link to a story on TPM's front page about the subject of Obama's inexcusable defense and expansion of the tyrant Bush's police state tactics. Greenwald is but one of a growing chorus of voices on the left that are sounding the alarm on this.


    Whatever happened to her anyway? Not that I miss her in any way, but for a while it seemed she was a rising media personality but I've not seen her in quite some time.


    Thanks for that link, Ellen.

    To recap 4 years of our conversations here, the U.S. is stumbling oblivious into the gaping razor blade jaws of procurement impossibilities without the financial-economic means (or even pretense to means) to paper over all the rampaging irrationality.

    Also related to Jackie O.


    Re the Obama changes in Cuba policy: it is hard for me to imagine how one could do less and still claim to have made a change. What is left in place are the greatest obstacles to a change in US - Cuba relations...the embargo and the ban on Americans traveling to Cuba (an assault on American rights not Cubans). The Obama changes are welcome but minimal. Change we can calibrate with a microscope.

    It may be hard to be timid and bold at the same time.


    The Vidal quotation is from the 1970s. The Ferlinghetti poem was obviously written in the 1990s or early 2000s. If someone is stealing, it isn't Gore.


    "Sometimes if I'm not careful, I drift prematurely into my analysis of the American Political system: there is only one party in the United States, the Property party (thank-you, Dr. Lundberg for the phrase) and it has two wings, Republican and Democrat.
    Thanks, but I am unable to offer the exact Vidal essay this is from without first getting down to a library. The quote was pulled from a Google Books search snippet.

    It seems Vidal was referencing:

    The United States can be looked upon as having, in effect, a single party: the Property Party. This party can be looked upon as having two subdivisions: the Republican Party, hostile to accommodating adjustments (hence dubbed "Conservative"), and the Democratic Party, of recent decades favoring such adjustments (hence dubbed "Liberal"). The big reason third parties have come to naught--a puzzle to some political scientists--is simiply that no substantial group of property owners has seen fit to underwrite one. There is no Anti-Property Party.

    Ferdinand Lundberg. The Rich and The Super-Rich: A Study in the Power of Money Today. 1968. Lyle Stuart, Inc., New York
    Chapter Two - Room At The Top: The New Rich