<< linking up the ethos of socialism to that of the family is effective propaganda. >>
and Joanna Bujes rebuts:
<< We're either a human family -- or we aren't anything much. >>
I would go even further.
I think the left, however defined, should avoid like the plague tying tactics and strategies, and certainly larger social visions, to the family. Although the family is the pre-rational default position for people when they imagine political entities, it is (probably for that reason) a clear and consistent strategy of the right--possibly its fundamental strategy--and its invocation will only serve to weaken us over time. I don't even like comfy, "classic" left invocations of the family, such as the "fraternite" of "L-E-F" or unions' references to "brothers and sisters," although I'll go along with them for purposes of solidarity. Families are families, democracies are democracies, and anyone who thinks seriously about both will understand the fundamentally conflicting nature of the two forms. The child is all but helpless and depends on the love/care of the parent (love/care being hard to separate); in the healthy situation, this relationship of dependency is *abolished* with the maturity of the child. Why should we see any parallels with the politics of worker- citizens? If we do, shouldn't we work to *abolish* such conditions, rather than appeal to them? And I mean, even for short- term propaganda purposes; I think the "family" appeal is that reactionary and deadly.
This obviously gives an opening to another go-round of the nationalism question, and if so, my one contribution is: Yes, I recognize it.
---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- From: joanna bujes <jbujes at covad.net> Reply-To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 11:10:48 -0800
>
>
>Miles Jackson wrote:
>
>>If I were the Minister of Propaganda, that's the narrative I'd
>>link to socialism: public resources like roads, libraries, and
>>health care are analogous to many family and volunteer activities.
>>We pool our resources and work together for our mutual benefit.
>>Given that virtually no one in our society wants to replace
>>the existing family and religious institutions with capitalist
>>relations (e.g., all breastfeeding as a commodified service),
>>linking up the ethos of socialism to that of the family is
>>effective propaganda. It's a simple idea, and it's congruent
>>with core American values.
>>
>Not entirely. If the "family" you're creating/nurturing/protecting is
>just an American family that has the right to meet its needs ahead of
>other "families," .....
>
>We'd still be in Iraq, protecting our "family's" interests. etc. We're
>either a human family -- or we aren't anything much.
>
>So far as economics is concerned I would argue that "sharing" is the
>most efficient way to go.
>
>Joanna
>
>>
>>
>
>
>___________________________________
>http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>
________________________________________________________________