shag
At 01:14 PM 10/3/2009, Michael Pollak wrote:
>On Sat, 3 Oct 2009, shag carpet bomb wrote:
>
>>On the question of what is to be done, I do not see that as difficult.
>>what is to discuss. It is very simple. Marx outlined it nicely...
>
>Yeah, he did. According to him, the only solution to the problem was a
>violent revolution when the time was right.
>
>>We are not here to *support* Liberalism. We are here to kill it....
>
>So can I assume that's your solution too? And can you explain to me how
>that's going to work out well?
>
>Because if you're thinking of an electoral strategy, what you says makes
>no sense to me. You think you are going to attack the fundamental beliefs
>of 90%+ of the population with the express goal of destroying them and
>that's going to get them to join your side? Because if they don't, of
>course, you can't win an election.
>
>It's seems to me you gotta make a choice, influence elections or
>overthrowing the electoral system. I think the military option is beyond
>dotty. I find it hard to believe you don't believe the same. But so far
>that's the only implication I can draw from what you say about killing
>liberalism. If you think there's something besides those two options (and
>different than SA's emphasis on influencing elections through the power of
>an organized movement that allies with liberalism from a position of
>strength) I can't think of what it is and you haven't made it clear. I'm
>all ears.
>
>Michael
>
>
>___________________________________
>http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk