-----Original Message----- From: owner-lbo-talk at lists.panix.com [mailto:owner-lbo-talk at lists.panix.com]On Behalf Of billbartlett at dodo.com.au Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 9:46 AM To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com Subject: Re: Fwd: green dysfunctionality and left disengagement
At 3:55 PM -0400 29/7/02, ajacobson at igc.org wrote:
>Thank you for the clarification of language--that is what I intended to
say.
>
>As for your point, I don't think it is an overstatement to say that
virtually
>every political strategy available to the left has been tried at one point
or
>another. Since we don't have socialism, I guess they can all be termed a
>failure.
That's a bit strong. We can conclude that some strategies have failed, but others may simply lack all the necessary elements to succeed.
>Yet people struggle and occassionally wring concessions from capital. So if
>mass movements are the only "successful" strategy, in a sense, than the
left
>should do whatever improves the chances for mass movements to develop and
>succeed, and IMHO that happens outside the DP.
One of the elements required for a successful mass movement is mass popular support. It isn't just action/organisation that is required, though that is necessary. You can have all the action and organisation in the world and you still only have a movement, to make it a mass movement a necessary element is to convince a mass of people that its aims are worthy and its strategy is viable.
Developing arguments that support the case for socialism seems a necessary part of convincing people. The "education" wing of "education, organisation, emancipation" is not an optional extra, it is an essential pre-condition to success. This is where some of those strategies for achieving socialism have fallen down in their execution.
The interesting thing is that other movements have adopted this strategic combination more successfully that the socialists who originally conceived it.
Bill Bartlett Bracknell Tas