At 03:12 PM 3/4/2006, Carrol Cox wrote:
>info at pulpculture.org wrote:
> >
> > I don't think it matters how we presented anything. The fact remains that
> > the people who've been pushing to turn the tide on this issue would have
> > made this their goal no matter how we _framed_ the issue.
>
>I'm not interested in "framing" for outreach; I'm interested in how the
>left poses the issue for itself. "Choice" implied and implies a polite
>approach to the powers that be to be nice. That is not very useful in
>developing solidarity. Choice is for sunshine soldiers and summer
>patriots. It provides a framework for all those, male or female, who
>wrap their "pro-choice" support in endless cotton-wool about how
>abortion in itself is "bad" and we should make it unnecessary and so
>forth. Breaking a hip is bad; having a plastic and steel replacement for
>it is not in the slightest bad, and it would be insane to wrap a demand
>for single-payer health insurance in rhetoric about needing also to cut
>down on icy sidewalks. The two issues are utterly unrelated. That is,
>there is no relationship between "preventing unwanted pregnancies" and
>"providing free abortion services on demand." The second is an
>absolutely unnegotiable demand, the former is all very fine in itself
>but does not enter into the struggle for abortion.
>
>Carrol
>___________________________________
>http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
"Scream-of-consciousness prose, peppered with sociological observations, political ruminations, and in-yore-face colloquial assaults."
-- Dennis Perrin, redstateson.blogspot.com
Bitch | Lab http://blog.pulpculture.org