----- Original Message ----- From: "joanna" <123hop at comcast.net> To: <lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org> Sent: Monday, May 23, 2005 2:47 AM Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] Anti-C v. anti-c
Tom Walker wrote: Of course, the obvious defence against charges of anti-communism is to claim that one is simply anti-Communist. However, to be anti-Communist without being anti-communist requires a highly developed sensitivity to nuance and innuendo and a scrupulous avoidance of them. That is, if one is clumsily anti-Communist, one becomes objectively anti-communist and often objectively anti-left. In a climate of general denunciation, anyone who doesn't join in is implicated as a dupe, fellow-traveler, etc... ___________________________ This all reminds me of a button that my ex wanted to make up after the Soviet Union went bust. It would have read:
"I am not now, nor have I ever been an ex-communist."
One of his funnier inventions.
Labels, labels, labels.
To some folks "communism" means dictatorship of the proletariat/nomenclatura. To others it means evil totalitarianism. Since we don't speak in upper or lower case, it doesn't really matter whether we advertise ourselves as communists, Communists, anti-communists, or Anti-Communists.
It is important to reclaim the words I want to use -- so I might say something like "I'm a communist; I think we should share." But the truth is that "communist" pushes such deep buttons that unless I use it as an alternative to "Fuck you. You don't scare me" there's not much point....
So normally, if pressed, I'll confess to socialism. That tends to stop conversation dead too. But, what does it matter any more? When all this gets sorted out, I suspect words-as-labels will play little or no part.
Joanna
___________________________________ http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk