>Doug Henwood wrote:
>>
>> Macdonald Stainsby wrote:
>
>> > Meaning that our orientation is far less concerned
>> >with appearances than it is results.
>>
>> Right. And several people at Zizek's Esssen conference on Lenin said
>> that Leninism was about "concrete analysis of the concrete
>> situation." What is specifically Leninist about this, or giving
>> priority to results over appearances?
>
>I would disagree with Essen Conference, with Doug & Zizek, and to a
>large extent with Mac. Personally, I wouldn't try to state the "essence"
>of Lenin ("Leninism" is probably a misleading term) in less than several
>hundred pages.
That wasn't me or Zizek - it was, among other people, Alex Callinicos. For Zizek, what is most valuable about Lenin for today was the way he rethought absolutely everything after the soc dem parties voted for war credits in 1914 - since we need that kind of degree zero rethink now. Which all sounds very intellectual, I know, but somebody's got to do it.
Speaking of thought, and its relation to action, it seems to me that antiwar activists right now have to think seriously about what message they're conveying. I keep hearing people mechanically applying an anti-interventionist template to S11. But this isn't simply an imperial adventure abroad, like Kosovo or Kuwait - we have to think about just what the right response is to a direct attack on us. A simple "No!" won't cut any ice.
Doug