I mean, I think the thing your critics will say is, yeah butt... right now, we need politicians to make things better right now. I think, here, the goal is to retain the current state and to reform from within, no? In which case, a social movement's *only* purpose is for agitation, to put the scare into politicians and capitalists so that they will concede certain terms in their own enlightened self-interest.
Under such a view, there is no role for the members of a social movement to play other than to put their bodies out their, in public, in order to make capital quake in its boots. Once the powers that be make reforms, apparently the goal is to get so much reform that you can get the vanguard leadership into positions of power in the government and change it even more, no?
I, personally, have never considered this as a path to change, but once when Michael Pollak responded in horror to the idea that a revolutionary movement must would destroy the democratic party (i was playing off Marx's rhetoric in a letter to Arnold Ruge). Michael dismissed this as a violent, destructive path he wasn't interested, himself, in pursuing.
It occurred to me then that there is this fundamental difference that undergirds many recurrent debates - a foundational difference that cannot be reconciled.
<> The ally (or rather allies) we need now are not experts counseling <> Congress <> & the President to be more decent. Such counsel never has any <> particular <> effect anyhow, any more than a half dozen "progressive" congressmen. <> <> Our allies are not counseling anyone; they are saying WE might to this <> to <> increase the number of militants at our demos and militants at our <> meetings <> engaging in the collective thinking we have to do. I suppose this <> fellow <> could become an ally by joining Freedom Road or even RCP and making <> public <> speeches about how vicious everything every establishment economist <> has said <> for half a century and that we need to kick the government out, not <> the <> people who are in government. Public figures who make that kind of a <> splash <> may help, but on the whole I think we can ignore them. <> <> #OWS is telling leftists something too. At least for the period <> immediately <> ahead we are not begging the powers that be for anything; we are <> mobilizing <> and expanding our own ranks. <> <> Carrol <> <> <> -----Original Message----- <> From: lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org <> [mailto:lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org] <> On Behalf Of MICHAEL YATES <> Sent: Friday, December 02, 2011 7:19 PM <> To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org <> Subject: [lbo-talk] sachs and poland <> <> <> Gar, I'll tell you what.Next time there is a big strike, why don't you <> write <> to Sachs and ask him to donate money to the strikers. And join their <> picket <> line. Then get back to us. And if you talk to him, demand that he <> apologize <> to all he hurt. Former addicts on the 12-step program do that, why not <> Sachs? Get back to us on that too. <> <> <> <> Sachs will support whatever he wants to support no matter what I say <> or <> whether I like him or not. If he supports good things, good.But let's <> not be <> overly respectful, grateful even, of someone who has been an asshole <> and <> whose advice helped cause people to die just because his views now <> overlap <> some with our own (I should speak for myself here; his views may <> overlap a <> great deal with yours). And I don't see any need to solicit his <> support. <> He'll give it or he won't. And my guess is that in the end, it won't <> matter <> much either way. <> ___________________________________ <> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk <> <> ___________________________________ <> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk <>
-- http://cleandraws.com Wear Clean Draws ('coz there's 5 million ways to kill a CEO)