> Chuck0 wrote:
>
>
>>If you want to trace the influence of socialist and Marxist ideas
>
> on the
>
>>anti-capitalist movements, you'd be getting warmer if you brought
>
> up the
>
>>Situationists and autonomist Marxists. The council communist
>
> movement
>
>>and so on.
>
>
> History lesson, Chuckster. Karl Korsch *was* a council communist, and Edward Thompson was a huge influence on what Harry Cleaver likes to call"autonomist" Marxism.
I know that. ;-)
My point was these other authors are not influences on the anti-capitalist movement, at least here in North America. I've never seen mention of most of these names in any writing by North American anti-capitalists. And I know what the real influences are.
> As for your suggestion that the majority of activists in today's anti-capitalist movement (whatever that is) are influenced by Situationism or whatnot, I have to smirk. Even in Germany, which is about ten times more advanced than
> the U.S. as far as activism goes, most anti-glob types are more likely to be influenced by left-liberal writers like Naomi Klein, Susan George, etc. Empire seems to be a book a tiny handful of people drop the name of but never read, and
> John Holloway's Change the World Without Taking Power is making dents here and there,but still, the majority of today's activist get about as radical as reading Noam Chomsky.
I don't know what criteria you use to say that anti-capitalist activism in Germany is more advanced than here in North America. I just don't see that, because North American anti-capitalists are pretty cutting edge. Perhaps they don't spend their time reading books and writing theory, but their track record on the streets is pretty advanced.
I think that contemporary anti-capitalists are influenced by many of the liberal left writers in the movement, anarchist writers, and historical stuff like the Situationaists. I just haven't seen any mention in N.A. anti-capitalist writings of any of these authors mentioned by Dissident Marxism.
> Not that there's anything wrong with that, but I think it's a real mistake to assume that just because us smart folks on the internet are into reading certain things, that necessarily means that those are hegemonic ideas with the broader layers of folk who aren't motivated by much other than a desire for a better world.
>
> As for Doug's point about activists in other countries, I'd agree that probably figures like Sweezy, Baran, and Amin are influential figures *still* in what is sometimes called the "Third World."
Should I run a survey on Infoshop.org asking people which writers have been most influential to them as anti-capitalists?
<< Chuck0 >>
Homepage -> http://chuck.mahost.org/ Infoshop.org -> http://www.infoshop.org/ Monumental Mistake (blog) -> http://chuck.mahost.org/weblog/index.php Practical Anarchy Online -> http://www.practicalanarchy.org/ Infoshop Portal -> http://portal.infoshop.org/ Infoshop Science -> http://science.infoshop.org/ AIM: AgentHelloKitty
If people eat their ballots, then that nut-case Stockwell Day will get in. Right-wingers aren't angst-ridden about voting. Don't we have to vote strategically, even if that means voting for the Liberals?
Having to decide between Tweedledum and Tweedledee -- that's not a choice -- that's a threat. Our electoral system favors a two-party race, and we should reject it. We have to start working towards a democratic system that doesn't force people to vote for the lesser of two evils (or the evil of two lessers). We can't keep jumping from election to election, voting for one moron because we're terrified that there's something worse. Now's the time to stop legitimizing this process and take a stand for fundamental, long-term change. It's more important to call attention to the farce of electoral politics than to split-hairs by choosing between Tweedledumb andTweedledee (or The Mad Hatter, the Queen of Hearts and the Doormouse for that matter).
- The Edible Ballot Society <http://edibleballot.tao.ca/faq.html>