[lbo-talk] tell them what to think about

[Carrol Cox]

Middle peasants 'made' the Chinese Revolution -- BUT, they did so by 
identifying _their_ interests with the interests of the poor peasants 
(and at one stage of the struggle, even with the interests of teh 'rich' 
peasants and the landlords). I took the pains to respond to the original 
post as part of my ongoing campaign to separate resistance to capitalism 
from knee-jerk moralism. The response to capitalism as _evil_ is 
fundamentally wrong  and fucks up intelligent politics. That headline no 
doubt embodies capitalist ideology, but that should not deflect 
anti-capitalist analysis into mere sloganeering.

Carrol

On 8/2/2011 1:16 PM, lbo83235 wrote:


> On Aug 2, 2011, at 7:26 PM, Carrol Cox wrote:
>
>> Marx would have agreed that there exists a level of poverty that incapacitates workers for any higher task. The headline may give the simple empirical truth.
>
> My immediate reaction to the headline was roughly the same as Dennis' (if I understand the annoyance suggested by his subject line correctly) but after reading the article and thinking about some of the practical challenges involved in a current organising effort, I realised the point Carrol invokes (for the umpteenth time) is probably, unfortunately, very valid. Which in a way goes to the recent Julio / SA / Carrol exchange (and even the Doug-v-Patrick-Bond throw-down of old about the effects of "hard times" on radicalisation / mobilisation / leftishism). Contra Carrol, it might even be the basis of an argument in favour of engagement in electoral politics, if only for the sake of whatever limited minimising of damage to the exploited classes can be achieved thereby - and only as a kind of emergency back-stopping move to try to create (or rather, defend) the space for more meaningful engagement of workers in the "higher task" of organising. Maybe the key is to realise tha
t !
>   one can't engage in electoral politics with any hope of achieving genuinely "left" goals, but only in order to minimise damage to the space from within which such goals *can* be pursued.
>
> And even if they *can't* - well, hell, there's always Sisyphus and his goddamned rock.
>
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk