> This is especially the case because, as far as I can discern,
> only a very small minority want to build alternative communities
> and institutions, the new society in the shell of the old
> (plagiarizing the IWW). That being the case, there can only
> be actions of opposition and protest followed by cooptation.
Well, the success of the current movements can be attributed to those of us who have figured out that you have to do both: build counter-institutions and resist. The Old Left hasn't figured out thsi paradigm shift yet. They are still trying to take shortcuts. This usually involves narrow single issue campaigns or trying to co-opt whatever new wave of activism has broken out.
For the longest time I was trying to figure out why the Left bothered me so much. A few years ago it dawned on me that it was this slavish devotion to anti-imperialism and organization-building that was making them so ineffective and boring. If your politics always involves *opposing* something, say U.S. policies, then that makes you a reactionary, in that your dissent only happens when the enemy (the U.S.) does something that you don't like. What do you do in between these bursts of oppositionalism? My activist experience tells me that this period is filled with pointless campaigns to get new members for your organizations.
I don't know if I've put this the best way, but I've got alot more to say in response to this article.
<< Chuck0 >>
This was the year *everything* changed.
-- Commander Ivanova, 2261
Mid-Atlantic Infoshop -> http://www.infoshop.org/ Alternative Press Review -> http://www.altpr.org/ Practical Anarchy Online -> http://www.practicalanarchy.org/
Homepage -> http://flag.blackened.net/chuck0/home/
"A society is a healthy society only to the degree that it exhibits anarchistic traits."
- Jens Bjørneboe