snit snat wrote:
>
> At 07:14 PM 11/22/2004, Carrol Cox wrote:
>
> >Requests (particularly on this list) for a discussion of socialism seem
> >usually to be based on the assumption that socialism is the carrot that
> >moves the donkey (working class) along.
>
> that's your perception. it's wrong.
Jon Johanning wrote:
>
> [clip]
> I don't see why socialists, if they have something distinctive and
> important to say on the questions that are on the public's mind,
> shouldn't be just as pushy. If socialists have something to say that
> distinguishes them from social democrats, or what is called
> "liberalism" in today's rather perverted political lexicon, it
> presumably lies in their particular vision of what society should be
> like [clip]
Books and articles on socialism as an ideal possibility aren't hard to find; if you really need such assurance, look them up and read them.
A note: in local groups discussing activity, ideas are rarely if ever accepted exactly as proposed by the originator. The "something distinctive" which socialists have to contribute are the ideas that generate active thinking on tactics, goals, strategies among other members of the group, because socialists potentially have a better understanding of capitalism than do the other members of the group.
The need is to stop a war. The need is to get living-wage proposals accepted by city councils. The need is to stop sexual harassment in this or that workplace. The need is to discover ways to provide convenient abortion services for more women. Get to work and forget about socialism for awhile.
And if you yourself are not a revolutionary, why worry about whether a given revolutionary theory is correct or not? Carrol