[lbo-talk] _for_ what? (was Stop Flogging <...>)

Chuck0 chuck at mutualaid.org
Fri Jan 14 08:24:00 PST 2005


snit snat wrote:


> Take to the streets about _what_ exactly? A lost election? Vote fraud
> that _both_ sides engaged in? Bush? I can get behind racism, but how
> exactly do you explain that kind of structural racism in a society where
> people think racism has to be something overt, like thinking blacks are
> inferior?

How about getting rid of Bush? Over half of the country hates him. He's engaged in activities that qualify him as a war criminal. I don't think there is a shortage of reasons to motivate people to start a revolution in the streets.


> WTF would Dean call for street action? He's a democrat for fuck's sake.
> He wants to be _part_ of the establishment -- merely the democratic wing
> of the democratic party.

Amen. So why were progressives supposed to support these guys again?


> Unlike you, people have jobs, careers, and people who depend on them.
> They can't just start throwing rotten tomatoes and causing a ruckus in
> the streets.

A ruckus in the streets would win the planet a better fate. Your grandchildren are wondering why you aren't out there rioting. Hell, people in the Third World want to know why we aren't rioting. The Iraq War. Global warming. Capitalism. Racism. McDonalds. Wal-Mart. Plenty of reasons to riot, although its clear that the professional left won't stick its neck out to start something.


> And _for_ what exactly? Oh, great. Let's tear down capitalism. Then the
> fuck what? What next? People need something to protest _for_, not just
> protest against_.

Let's see if I remember this correctly. Before ABB, leftists and progressives were FOR something instead of capitalism. What was that? I can't seem to remember.


> It's like your complaint that no one gives you money.
> For what? People like to know they're giving money to get something
> accomplished, not just tossing it at someone and saying, "have a ball.
> do what you will." Maybe that's wrong of them, but them's the facts.

Isn't that what people are doing when they throw money at the Democrats? Moveon didn't move anything.

What have I done with very little funds?

1) Operated a progressive website for 10 years which currently reaches over 150,000 people a month 2) Opened infoshops in two cities with the collaboration of comrades 3) Stirred things up in the library profession with the anarchist librarians network 4) Published a few magazines 5) Helped organize several large anti-capitalist and anti-war protests


> Just like them's the facts when it comes to the ordinary person's
> ability to hit the streets protesting whenever they're pissed. If you're
> going to ask them to sacrifice, you bet your ass you better give them
> something to sacrifice for and not some abstract ideal or some promised
> utopian future that no one can exactly flesh out in any concrete way.

We should promise them more tax cuts.


> What is really annoying is that you DARE call anyone a lazy ass. Talk
> about calvinism. Not only are they supposed to sweat blood for capital,
> they're supposed to shout "how high?" when you bellow, "jump!" People
> work their asses off. The put in 9 hrs at work if they're lucky, around
> here they have 1/2 hr to 1.5 hr commutes, one way. Then they make
> dinner, do housework, play with the kids or help with the homework. Some
> of them have parents to take care of or relatives to help. The next
> thing you know, it's 9 p.m. and you're exhausted. You maybe get an hour
> to yourself -- if you didn't bring home work. Alas, you seem to want
> these people to give up even that lousy hour to themselves.

Sounds like the logical outcome of big labor's decision to support the Democrats for decades. People have to work more now because the AFL-CIA wasn't out in the streets in the 1980s. Or whenever.

But you know what? I don't buy this sob story about overworked Americans. These folks are making a choice to work their butts off. Their conscious decision to work all the time not only sabotages their families and their health, but it shortchanges social change movements. It's hard to accomplish anything when people are working overtime so they can buy more cheap plastic crap. Paying the rent is one thing, working your ass off to live in some suburban mansion filled with plastic crap is another. There are many poor people in America, but there aren't exactly many breadlines.

People need to work less. Fuck work!


> Oh, I know a lot of you think that, if everyone would just starting
> marching in the streets, the system would come crashing down around us.
> You're right it would, but you need a social movement infrastructure.
> AND, you need to cultivate a form of participatory citizenship. Our
> institutions and practices do not do this and, indeed, they actively
> subvert substantive democratic practices.

Marching in the streets is only one tactic, but it is far better than engaging in excuse-making. Yes, we need all of those things. I'm working on that every day. You can talk about building social movement infrastructure, meanwhile I'm running around trying to pay the rent on one physical manifestation of that infrastructure. We get very little support from the so-called progressives in this city. If we close our doors in a few months, which is very likely, we will be back to talking about these things.


> I have a lot of sympathy for the anarchist critique of planning. But, I
> tend to gravitate toward it because it's closer to what I think needs to
> happen than the model Carrol advocates. I believe that, if anything like
> a revolution is _ever_ to occur, it can only do so with a strong civil
> and social _infrastructure_ that instills in us the ability to run our
> own lives. Right now, it's bread and circuses, as Woj says. The skills
> people need -- working together, volunteering, helping others,
> organizing, planning, etc. etc. -- they have to be nourished. We have to
> have democratic structures that nurture substantive participation in the
> running our daily lives and ordering our obligations to one another. We
> don't have institutions and practices that foster that at the moment.

I agree with you, but at the same time you aren't seeing what is being done by people around you. We are building that social infrastructure. I've helped open two infoshops. There are lots of websites and magazines. There are over 150 Indymedia projects around the world now.


> If we are _ever_ going to be successful, we need to nourish them. We
> need to learn how to take care of ourselves.

Right. Nourishment means paying the rent. Does anybody have any ideas about how I can fundraise more money to keep our infoshop open?


> Which is why anarchism appeals to me: _when_ it focuses on building
> those small scale institutions and practices that cultivate citizenship
> in our imagined socialist democracy.

Right on.


> It is why I have said it's too bad we don't organize around the
> unemployed. Not so we can wave leaflets in their faces and get them to
> trot along to some boring meeting where they'll listen to someone drone
> on. That is self-serving, egotistical bullshit designed to advance an
> organization, not designed to nurture the kinds of people who can
> sustain a revolution and create a healthy society.

Unemployed? I hear you. I'm thinking about calling for a general strike in the library profession to dramatize the poor pay that library workers get. It looks like I'll have to organize this outside of the purview of the "official left" within my profession, as they have turned into conservatives who dislike anybody who challenges their letter-writing society.


> It's why I've advocated a kind of lefty transition program for the
> unemployed. People need help getting jobs. Instead of the fuckers at the
> unemployment office doing it or the xtians doing it, lefties help people
> help themselves. It doesn't have to be that, it can be anything at all.
> It's just an example I used this summer and sent poor Carrol into a
> tailspin.

Getting a job is not enough. When I finish this email I have to go complete two stupid questionnaires in order to apply to some jobs. But I want something more. I don't like working. We need people to work less. Abolish work!


> The experience of doing something, of accomplishing something, of
> helping others, of working together … that is what nourishes the kinds
> of people who are capable of running their own lives under anarchist
> conditions.
>
> The project --and we could think of all kinds of others like it--would
> be something doable. People need small scale successes to stay
> motivated. Asking people to protest for years and years and years,
> without _any_ to work toward except some distant anarcho-socialist
> future, with no demonstrable successes along the way, they will give up.

I agree and I know all too well what you are talking about. Practical projects are important. Fun is important. Movements built around sacrifice aren't very effective.


> That's why I think it's great that you do the infoshops. Those are ways
> of building the infrastructure we need to build a social movement.

Thanks.


> Marching in the streets, as Jon says, is only part of a must larger
> project.

Right.


> I don't mean to antagonize you, but I really get sick of this continual
> flogging of anyone who lives their life differently than you do or has
> different ways of achieving their goals. I'm sick of the endless demands
> to "jump" and the accusations that we are lazy asses.

No problem. The thing I like about this list is that it is full of polite ranters. ;-)

Chuck



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list