[lbo-talk] Marxism and Religion

[andie nachgeborenen]

I'm not sure how I would categorize '68, which wasn't
unitary at any rate. I think they got our masters
rather worried but I don't think they were a serious
threat to the existing order overall -- except in the
ex-Bloc with Czechoslovakia. I'm old-fashioned enough
to think that nothing that fails to engage large
numbers of working people in sustained radical
concerted action could be such a threat. General
strikes in France don't count, charmingly, French (and
Italian) workers do those for fun. ;-> '68 might,
perhaps have developed that way, but didn't.

  Be that as it may. The bare empirical claim you make
or pose is not by itself interesting to me except as a
scholarly historical matter, for which, as a mere
scholarly matter, I have limited time. I'm more
concerned about whether there's prospect for forward
motion.

--- wrobert at uci.edu wrote:


> My comment was primarily an empirical one.  I noted
> that there was
> substantial upheaval in Europe after 1848.  I made
> no reference to its
> capacity of engaging in the same activity now either
> explicitly or
> implicitly.  My point was simply that the history
> has been rockier for the
> ruling classes then implied by Yoshie's description.
>  I don't see a
> challenge to that fact.  Since you have declared
> that the radical
> movements of 1968 don't fit into this series of
> upheavals I'm curious how
> you would categorize them.  For me, they still
> constitute a serious
> challenge to the world structure at the time
> whatever they are categorized
> as.
> 
>                                 robert wood
> 
> Moreover, '68 wasn't exactly a
> > even failed worker's revolutionary movement,
> unlike,
> > say, Spain '30-39, Germany 1918, Russia 1917, and
> > going _back_. There was radical workers' activism
> in
> > the 60's and even afterward -- maybe the last of
> it
> > seen lately on a mass scale was the early days of
> > Solidarnosc in 1980-81 -- but even that is a very
> long
> > time ago and not exactly in the capitalist core.
> And
> > see what came of it. Probably irrationally I do
> not
> > despair, but from where I stand it would not be
> > irrational _to_ despair, and while I concede that
> > things might change very fast in an unforeseeable
> way,
> > and I'd be glad if they did, it's ipso facto not
> > foreseeable that things will so change. From here
> it
> > looks like a long shot against high odds over a
> very
> > long period. If you can show me I'm wrong, I will
> be
> > gratified.
> >
> 
> 
> ___________________________________
>
http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
> 

 
____________________________________________________________________________________
Sucker-punch spam with award-winning protection. 
Try the free Yahoo! Mail Beta.
http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta/features_spam.html