[lbo-talk] soft bigotry...

[Michael Dawson]

> > I am not defending or proposing that we ignore
> > institutions and structures, quite the opposite. Of course we must
> primarily
> > concentrate on changing and abolishing unjust institutions; however, in
> the
> > mean time, let us not lose a basic respect for the people in them by
> > withholding a demand for accountability.
> 
> Whaaa--?  Let's recognize the influence of social institutions and
> simultaneously hold people accountable for behavior that is an
> inextricable part of those social institutions?  To put it bluntly,
> this is not a logically coherent argument.  If social institutions
> shape behavior, it's naive individualism to see the behavior of
> individuals in social institutions as the product of "individual
> moral agency".
> 
> Nor are people social dopes, to anticipate the straw man response:
> behavior in a social situation is a precipitate of the complex
> interaction of biological, psychological, and social factors
> (did I leave anything out?).  To question "individual moral
> agency" as the determining factor in social behavior is not to
> "lower expectations" about people; it is to appreciate the
> complexity of social life and how we reproduce social structures
> through our interactions.
> 
> Miles

The point is that low expectations of the masses are part and parcel of
class rule.  Recognizing that isn't necessarily bourgeois individualism.  It
means that we need to stop doing it.  That, in turn, means we need to
provide everybody with truly equal access and incentive to best-practice
institutions and resources.  Talk is not enough, which is why Bush's shit is
so maddening, as is all mainstream discussion of, e.g., education in the
last 30 years.  Show us the money, fuckers!