>shag carpet bomb wrote:
> >
> > reasonable is the key word there. they know there's a left, they are
> > anticommunists who think leftists are crazy for wanting to get rid of
> > capitalism. hence, we are unreasonable; it conventional vernacular:
> > whack jobs.
> >
>
>This is why it's necessary to be so nimble in mass organizing -- one of
>the reasons for creating "front groups." "Fronts" don't have to be
>deceptive. In the Spring of '69 at ISU we (SDS) created a group called
>SAW (Students Against War) for just two weeks. Why. Threre was a student
>who wanted to work with us and who was a good organizer, but he just
>didn't want to be called SDS! Everyone knew SAW & SDS were the same, but
>somehow it made a difference.
>
>Carrol
i don't know about that. i'm talking about the reaction max sawicky had, when I rejected jane hamsher's and the firedog lake crew. for max, i was being unreasonable. same people who think that those on the left who reject voting and alliance with the DP are unreasonable. if you don't make compromises to ally with the majority, then you are unreasonable. the refrain: how are you ever going to change things, they ask, if you don't work with the majority to get small, piecemeal changes now. you guys are just crazy! how many times have you read ppl on the list say that this or that leftist, groupuscle, whatever is "out of touch" - unreasonable - when they say something or advocate something that they think the majority of USers would reject? it's like a godamned high school popularity contest. oh noes! don't say that, some mook will think you are a big meenie and they won't like us!
shag
>
-- http://cleandraws.com Wear Clean Draws ('coz there's 5 million ways to kill a CEO)