[lbo-talk] The Ideology Problem

[shag carpet bomb]

At 09:31 PM 5/3/2010, SA wrote:
>shag carpet bomb wrote:
>
>>well, i guess i was thinking that mass political movements refer to 
>>movements inspired by marxism, not Liberalism. Maybe I am misreading.
>
>What I meant was that the real, existing, historical mass political 
>movements that were "inspired by Marxism" weren't really inspired by what 
>*you* think of as Marxism. Their Marxism (except for a few heterodox 
>intellectuals) was about Progress, Science, Justice, Democracy, etc. Yours 
>is probably a more accurate and certainly more philosophically 
>sophisticated version, in which contesting liberal ideas about 
>individuals/freedom/knowledge occupies an important place. In other words, 
>I think most of the historically existing mass Marxist movements in the 
>West were what you would call Enlightenment Liberal.
>
>SA

so, they were inspired by justice as equality of opportunity? the goal 
being every should have the same starting line? they were inspired by a 
notion of rational autonomy, where the individual must experience, and 
thus, know for herself? that freedom from is the only freedom we can aspire 
to because the freedom to is potentially tyranical?

i'm not saying you're wrong, i just don't know enough of the movements in 
question to run the theory through concrete examples of what you mean.

now, i'm starting to think that what you are talking about are movements 
inspired by liberalism, in which case the issue is: context. what's 
inspiring is the ideals of liberalism as contrasted to whatever was around 
at the time. (e.g., feudalism for w. europe). in which case, then the 
problem you think you see is that we're no longer struggling against, say, 
feudalism. it's not inspiring in contemporary contexts. which is partly why 
comes off as policy wonkery: it's minor tweaks against an "enemy" that is 
its fraternal twin.

*shrug*

shag