Woj,<br><br>I thought it was important to have the whole of the original emails before us so I am sending them to the list in 3 parts. <br><br><div style="direction: ltr;"><span class="q"><span class="gmail_quote">On 4/14/06,
<b class="gmail_sendername">Wojtek Sokolowski</b> <<a href="mailto:sokol@jhu.edu" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">sokol@jhu.edu</a>> wrote:</span></span></div><div style="direction: ltr; color: rgb(0, 0, 153);">
<span class="q">
<br>Look, it goes without saying that if most people were organized, elites<br>would not be able to do what they are doing. In fact, it is tautological,<br>true by definition. The real question is not whether the elite would be
<br>able to hold to power if grunts were organized (the answer is obvious), but<br>why aren't the grunts organized? How you answer this question determines<br>what you want to do about it.<br><br>The above quoted passages suggest, at least in my mind, that the answer you
<br>suggest is insufficient organizing effort, as in the US, as opposed to<br>better effort, as in France. I disagree. Organizing is important, to be<br>sure, but it does not take place in vaccuum. There is a myriad of other
<br>factors that affect the level of organization. The fact that the US workers<br>are not in rebellion is certainly not because of the lack of trying. I<br>think there has been more conscious efforts to organize people in the US
<br>than almost everywhere else. In fact, the volume of organizing in the US<br></span></div><div style="direction: ltr; color: rgb(0, 0, 153);">was such that for every left wing organizer there were dozens of<span class="q">
<br>counter-organizers, organizing people for religion, consumption, right wing
<br>and patriotic causes, philanthropic causes, community concersns and what<br>not.</span></div><br>Wojtek,<br><br>Let
me say, from the evidence of your email, that your problem does not
seem to be with the idea of education, organization, and mobilization
but with the people of the U.S. or perhaps with U.S. workers. <br><br>Let me for a moment
accept your point of view. Then where does that lead us? Should we
simply give up on the U.S. and trying to build a social movement here?
If we do then what? Should we simply hope that the U.S. is defeated by
outside forces somehow? Collapses from within? Or perhaps we should
hope that everyone in the world gives up and allows the U.S. rulers and
owners have their way? Because if the rest of the world doesn't
give-up then their will be unspeakable atrocities. If they do give up
then their will simply be the triumph of a new form of slavery, the
complete dominance of transnational corporations, international
political and economic planning by the elite manager's of those
corporations, etc. In your view we should just wait for the Great
Disaster, and then start to do something. (See below) This is very
chiliastic and seems to be the kind of irrationalist symptom that you
would criticize if expressed by a fundamentalist Christian Republican.
Your version of a rapture, is what you are telling me makes it
impossible to organize when it presents itself in the "common folk." In
this you are no different than the people you say we can't organize and
it is precisely these views that we must fight against,
<br><br>Essentially the choice that is presented to us is a variation
of the old choice between socialism or barbarism -- between the
spreading of democratic political and economic forms and a new dark
ages. That is the way it seemed to me 25 years ago. But today the
choice seems to me to be between human democratic movements and (near)
extinction of our species by environment degradation or nuclear war. <br><br>I simply disagree with you about the amount of left
organizing in this country. If you see how much effort goes into
trying to organize people in places like Rio de Janeiro and El
Salvador, as I have, and how many times people fail before they have
any kind of success at all you would realize that the U.S.
is different only in the fact that more U.S. people have given up on
changing things than anything else. There are reasons for this and
these reasons we have to fight. Some of the reasons are recounted in
your previous email. But the point is, you either give up or you keep
on fighting. There are no magic bullets. There are no exceptions.
Besides the technological innovations, which are merely aids to
organizing, there are no new fangled ways of organizing. The best ways
are still face to face. <br><br>The best ways of organizing are not essentially different
than the way religious people recruit... with this difference... we
want to try to be Democratic and let people discover the world for
themselves. We want both solidarity and independent thinking. If we
don't allow for both then we may win some battles but in the long run
we won't accomplish what we want. We will fail and we will have to
start anew. And when we are defeated, thoroughly, the next generation
will have to start all over again, with little memory of what we went
through. It's been this way for at least 2,500 years maybe more,
perhaps longer. The costs of failure keep on growing, but so do the
benefits of success. <span style="font-weight: bold;">"Fail. Fail again. Fail better." </span>(Beckett).
This has been my "writing motto" ever since I have been 20 and I first
read it. It is another variation of Gramsci's oft quoted, "Pessimism
of the intellect; optimism of the will." <br><br><br><br><br>