Lots of former leftwingers such as Trotskyists have become right wingers. Why is it impossible to go the other way. Isn't that what happened to one Doug Henwood?
Cheers, Ken Hanly
Blog: http://kenthink7.blogspot.com/index.html Blog: http://kencan7.blogspot.com/index.html
--- On Mon, 3/15/10, Chip Berlet <c.berlet at publiceye.org> wrote:
> From: Chip Berlet <c.berlet at publiceye.org>
> Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] more on who the TPers are
> To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org
> Date: Monday, March 15, 2010, 4:21 PM
> Hi,
>
> I agree with Sean Andrews. No experienced left
> organizer would target
> right-wing leaders or consolidated movement activsts for
> conversion.
> What is being contested is the ideological direction of
> hundreds of
> thousands--perhaps millions-- of people who have every
> right to be angry
> at all sorts of government policies, but who only see the
> political
> right offering to help them resolve their grievances.
>
> Cynicism can be cut to fit any social situation, but only
> organizing
> causes societal change.
>
>
> Chip Berlet
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org
> [mailto:lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org]
> On Behalf Of Sean Andrews
> Sent: Monday, March 15, 2010 3:12 PM
> To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org
> Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] more on who the TPers are
>
> On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 13:41, Doug Henwood <dhenwood at panix.com>
> wrote:
> > [those leftists who think that the Tea Partiers are
> somehow reachable
> by us
> > - whatever reachable means, and whoever us is - take a
> gander at this]
> >
>
> They may not be reachable by leftists, but they once again
> demonstrate
> to leftists what it means to have some actual principles
> against which
> you compare politicians actions (rather than letting them
> get off on
> "realist" policy compromises alone.) I'm not saying
> these are
> rational or coherent principles: but they are principles
> nonetheless.
> It is also interesting that it seems many of these
> principles are
> generated from small, grassroots meetings (meetings which,
> perhaps,
> amplify messages they've heard elsewhere, but which serve
> as a setting
> for what Habermas might call rational critical
> debate.) In recent
> years, the presumption among some leftish academics seems
> to have been
> that, situations like these--where true democracy could
> emerge--would
> inevitably generate the kind of egalitarian principles that
> they would
> have liked to propose if they weren't afraid of sounding
> like passe
> Marxists. In other words, the focus has been on
> process of developing
> politics rather than content or principles. Though I
> can only stand
> to read him so long, this seems to be the direction
> Habermas has gone
> in recent years as have many other theorists of democracy
> and law.
>
> I think the current encounter may demonstrate (though of
> course its
> still a hypothesis) that:
>
> 1. this is still a hegemonic struggle, not some mushy
> democratic
> consensus building project; and
>
> 2. to participate in a hegemonic struggle you have to have
> some actual
> principles and ideas--ideas you're not afraid to say out
> loud and with
> conviction.
>
> I think it would be especially important in these polls to
> see how
> many people who are involved in these movements are the
> very nascent
> political activists, people who have been brought out
> because they are
> disgruntled and are experiencing their first political
> awakening on
> this basis. I think Doug is saying that many of them
> believe in some
> way in such a strong way they can't be converted.
> That may be true,
> but that can also be the sign of the intransigence of
> ideology you
> often see in people who've just gotten on their feet.
> In other words,
> this lot may be lost, but if there were actually strong
> institutions
> built with clear alternative interpretations it might
> make a
> difference. For instance, if Kos and MoveOn weren't
> such Demo
> hucksters, but instead had the interest in ideas to have
> some clear
> left partisans on their side--rather than sending around
> e-mails to
> poll their readers about whether they should support the
> piece of crap
> health care bill.
>
> s
>
> s
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>