[lbo-talk] Anarchism, was Cuba

[Chuck]

John Thornton wrote:

> So let me get this straight.
> Anarchists could push through Universal Health Care just as easily under 
> Bush as they could under Gore.
> Who your Senator or Congressperson are will have less effect than 
> anarchists "direct action on the health care issue".
> Voting for representatives who favor Universal Health Care is actually 
> counter-productive to implementing Universal Health Care.
> Anyone who thinks otherwise is a zombie wedded to left-liberal 
> Castro-loving ideas that belong in the ash can of history.
> The moon is made of Stilton.

Anarchists are in no position to push through Universal Health Care and 
we wouldn't do that anyway because we aren't interested in participating 
in electoral, statist politics.

The Democrats are in a better position, but they won't push for it. If 
Universal Health Care is pushed through by anybody, it will be by 
grassroots activists. I think that direct action and militant protest on 
this issue may hasten UHC into existence. The ruling class has shown in 
the past a willingness to throw out some social programs to stave off 
open rebellion.

Dennis Perrin wrote:
 >>Your refusal to see that even incremental differences mean real
 >>differences for millions of people is scary. It's like a religious
 >>fundamentalists who keeps clinging to his faith no matter how many holes
 >>you poke in it.
 >>
 >>John Thornton

 > Precisely.
 >
 > Dennis

If this was directed at me, it doesn't address any actual position I hold.

Incremental differences do mean real differences to millions of people. 
I already cited in a previous email today the Anarchist FAQ and its 
explanation of why anarchists work on reforms, but are against reformism.

Much of my day-to-day activism involves working with people to achieve 
incremental differences on a variety of issues.

But people are attacking me here for not being unrealistic when I adhere 
to standard anarchist positions.

Anarchists are better off fighting for more radical social change on all 
of these issues, as well as for the big picture of "revolution" or 
whatever you want to call it. I don't get why people are attacking 
anarchists for being anarchists. If we wanted to be reformists and work 
within the system, we'd be social democrats. The whole point of being an 
anarchist is to fight for something more radical.

Chuck