Max Sawicky wrote:
> . Yoshie's ultra-
> cosmopolitan marxism or the blanket of moral condemnation
> that Carrol would have us all visit upon the nation as a
> consciousness-raising exercise are perfect tickets to
> political oblivion.
For the record, neither Yoshie nor I have ever consulted our (non-existent) crystal balls to describe *how* or in what language or under what conditions a mass movement can/will be generated. We leave that to those in possession of second sight (like populists or new-style social democrats). And *of course* the language and the slogans etc. one would use in responding to, joining, or trying to generate a mass movement would be rather different from the language, etc one uses on a maillist.
A mass movement is however necessary, and it *cannot* and *will* not be generated by general appeals to a (non) existing mass audience in *any* language or *any* content. The problem in fact is not what to say or how to say it. Despite all the fuss on this list on these questions, it is a no-brainer. Many of us have long ago worked out in practice quite effective answers to those questions.
The problem (to which I have no solution) is not what to say but *how to get the audience in to the auditorium* -- and that must be done *without* speaking to them. This is in fact where "spontaneity" comes in. (Spontaneity usually means only something like unexpected and unpredictable rising up of local organizers.) When that happens (and nothing else will happen until it does), any language you use will be effective -- you will have an audience demanding to be spoken to.
Then the question is not to persuade them to general truths (like capitalists or bad etc) but how to communicate the ideas in terms of which they can maintain the momentary but passing solidarity generated "spontaneously." And for that purpose the same ideas and words must be used all over. In other words, lasting solidarity requires a jargon.
Carrol