On Dec 20, 2011, at 8:41 PM, Maria Gilmore wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Dec 2011 17:45:42 -0500, Carrol Cox <cbcox at ilstu.edu> wrote:
>> Actually, I don't think the economic argument is relevant to judging the
>> Move Your Money action.
> But the entire rationale for the action *is* economic. And according to most of what I've read here on this list, the propaganda for the action claims it will accomplish things it does not accomplish. Doesn't some level of honesty matter here? Is it okay to urge others to engage in pretending to themselves they're making some kind of difference when they are not?
For Carrol, it's all about action! The reason he doesn't like our activistism piece is because he's an activismist.
I thought part of the point of political agitation was to educate people about how shit works. If you recruit a bunch of them to do something that really doesn't make much difference, and in the process makes them feel like it does, what exactly is politically fruitful about it? If you're organizing people around money and finance, it would be nice to show how money and finance connect to the "real sector."