On Jan 6, 2009, at 11:13 PM, Julio Huato wrote:
> Doug wrote:
>
>> My point, and it's hardly an original one, is that
>> the left, whatever that is, purports to agitate on
>> behalf of the masses, but the masses mostly don't
>> give a fuck.
>
> This is not the way I think of it. "On behalf" suggests that the
> masses *consciously* (or even half consciously) delegate certain
> functions (expressing the workers' "radical needs" and "broader
> interests," as Marx put it) to the left.
Heavens no. Insofar as the masses vote, they delegate those functions to professional politicians.
I'm talking about the way that conventional left discourse often legitimates itself by speaking in defense of/on behalf of a majority oppressed by a privileged minority. While that may be true in an objective sense, it's hardly in accordance with subjective reality. The people most down with "left" discourse are the metropolitan elites that Jim Straub likes to make fun of.
Like I said, this is hardly an original point and I don't want to perseverate. But I don't want my precious bromide misunderstood.
Doug