>People are being way too hard on Carrol, which he may sometimes invite by
>his use of condescending or charged language, but he's not alone in that. I
>think his politics tend towards ultraleftism, and he thinks mine go in the
>direction of right opportunism, but so what? I doubt anyone on this list,
>Carrol included, would disagree that a) big political changes occur only
>when there are big changes in social conditions and b) it doesn't follow
>that you should therefore abstain from political activity aimed at more
>modest changes at other times.
but that (b) is exactly where carrol does depart from many people here. his argument is that, right now, we should be working to the end the war. end of story. anything else you do is a waste of time, distracts from the real mission. he's been saying this since the war began. sure, he's relented now that it looks like the u.s. may just pull out after all thus blowing a hole right into the Antiwar Movement Tire -- and the antiwar movement didn't even have anything to do with what the admin _appears_ to be doing (I don't buy it).
Anyway, i personally love Carrol in all his cranky glory, so don't get me wrong. But, I think it's safe to say that he's been talking since the war begain about how the only thig we should be doing is organizing, organizing, organizing around antiwar. things may be changing, so he's conceded that we should work on living wage issues.
But again, nothing here changed _because_ of the antiwar movement.
he can think whatever he likes. i am not going to change his mind --indeed no one's is trying to. what we probably WOULD like, however, is the space to be left alone to discuss this issues without incessantly being told that we are silly fucksticks impeding the path to revolution b/c we aren't protesting the war and organizing the socialist party (or whatever.)
Kelley
"We live under the Confederacy. We're a podunk bunch of swaggering pious hicks."
--Bruce Sterling