[lbo-talk] Anti-Globalization and Anti-War Movements in the USA

[Yoshie Furuhashi]

On 2/12/07, wrobert at uci.edu <wrobert at uci.edu> wrote:
> I definitely agree with Chuck on this one.  We need more of the fail,
> but fail better school of folks like Luxemburg, rather than an
> organizational Platonism.  I rather like her quote in response to
> Lenin.  "Historically, the errors committed by a truly revolutionary
> movement are infinitely more fruitful than the infallibility of the
> cleverest Central Committee." On the other hand, I do wish that young
> activists would read more theoretical material.  Not to get them to
> come up with the "correct" solution, but so perhaps they can start
> asking more interesting questions about those 'messy dynamic' actions
> and challenging their own assumptions.  I know that my reading
> allowed me to think about the anti-globalization actions that I was
> involved in in a more productive light.  (It goes without saying that
> the actions helped me understand the work of folks like Foucault a
> great deal more as well.)

Now we have an opportunity to compare anti-globalization and anti-war
movements: the former's ethos, structure, etc. was informed by
anarchists, and the largest national coalitions of the latter have
been run by the current and former members of central committees.
Both have failed, and neither has been fruitful in the USA.  Movements
here have been either episodic like the anti-globalization movement or
ritualistic like the anti-war movement.  After all is said and done,
lots of people from both turned to the Democratic Party, too, or at
least get stuck in electoralism.  Is there any way to get out of these
dead ends?
-- 
Yoshie
<http://montages.blogspot.com/>
<http://mrzine.org>
<http://monthlyreview.org/>