Michael, Max, et al. might be interested in taking a look at "Democratic Money: A Populist Perspective (with Lawrence Goodwyn and William Greider -- remarks presented on the occasion of the 100th anniversary of the Populist Sub-Treasury Plan for financial reform, Dec. 9, 1989, St. Louis, Missouri)," available at <http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/8569/Goodwyn.Greider.html>. While I'm sympathetic to Lawrence Goodwyn's desire to combat mass resignation & to project the glories of people's self-activity, his enemy (foreign creditors) & plan (to democratize the financial system in America without putting an end to capitalism) demonstrate the limits & problems of populism. And it is his anti-Marxism that limits his thoughts. Goodwyn says:
***** Because Solidarity stayed alive during the years of martial law, and because a man named Brezhnev who put down Solidarity passed off the stage of history and another man named Gorbachev who would not put down Solidarity came on the stage of history, the leading role of the Party this very week is going into the dustbin of history all over Eastern Europe.
What if we were to suggest to the American people that we can't do anything about the homeless, we can't attack the crisis in the cities, we can't do anything about the inability of the children of unionized workers to own a home of their own because America has been sold to foreign creditors, because it's being de-industrialized -- we can't do anything about any of these matters if we don't democratize the financial system in this country? In other words, we can't do anything until we get back to being as advanced as we were in 1889 in this city when the subtreasury system was first introduced. *****
It appears that Charles W. Macune is still popular among populists. As for people's self-activity, I agree with Goodwyn that we have a dire need of it. However, what matters equally is the nature & direction of people's self-activity. The tragic fate of Solidarity in Poland illustrates that.
Yoshie