[lbo-talk] Black Blocs & Other Peerennials

[Carrol Cox]

OWS is not a movement, though it promises to be the seedbed or many
movements, small and large. Nor is "it" a single entity. Statements about a
give Occupation do not apply to any other occupation necessarily. What
happened on one day in Oakland is about as significant as the mote in the i
in the poster for Pepsi Cola. Check out the number of independent activities
that have sprouted in Boston, thanks to that Occupation. Check out the
beginnings of a serious anti-foreclosure movement in Atlanta thanks to that
Occupation. This whole debate is a bit ridiculous.

Carrol

-----Original Message-----
From: lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org [mailto:lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org]
On Behalf Of Joseph Catron
Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2012 6:23 PM
To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org
Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] Black Blocs & Other Peerennials

On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 11:37 PM, Marv Gandall <marvgand at gmail.com> wrote:

My point was simply that the vast majority of today's Occupy supporters are
> (were?) teachers, government employees, transport and service workers, and
> other trade unionists, whose politics, like those of other mainstream
> groups represented in the movement, are mainly liberal Democratic.
>


> ...
>
>
The test of any movement is whether it can keep broadening its appeal. The
> presence of the anarchists and their romantic liberal apologists, judging
> by many first hand commentaries, appears to have reduced it
>

But the anarchists are the ones who actually built the movement, and have
in many cases sustained it. See, for a very cursory overview:
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2011/11/2011112872835904508.html

Now can the founders of a movement become impediments to broadening its
appeal? Of course. (See: Christianity.)

What then? It's a subjective question that depends entirely on where your
sympathies lie, and how you balance (for example) the respective merits of
anarchism and the Democratic Party, with the siren's song of short-term
effectiveness versus the hard work of building a sustainable revolutionary
project, etc., etc.

But leaving serious deliberations aside, there are hardly enough trade
unionists left in the United States to form the vast majority of anything.
That's pure fantasy-talk. And I care about participation, not "support."
Like most of us, I "support" any number of worthwhile causes for which I've
done jack squat. Should they be grateful?

My core point remains: Those who want a mass movement that doesn't look
like it was built by anarchists should get to work building it. Or, hell,
engage seriously (that means offline!) with this one and see where it gets
you. Curmudgeonly Internet screeds are pretty much the least acceptable,
most annoying of all possible options.

-- 
"Hige sceal þe heardra, heorte þe cenre, mod sceal þe mare, þe ure mægen
lytlað."
___________________________________
http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk