[lbo-talk] More on BB antics and their defenders

Carrol Cox cbcox at ilstu.edu
Sat Feb 11 06:56:13 PST 2012


Julio Huato: "When people disposed to more "militant" (wrong term!) actions systematically bring their views to the assemblies, make their tactical case, and then *submit* to the collective decisions, whatever they may be, then we don't have "methodological anarchism," but -- well -- some form of democracy."

That is more like pure fantasy. What and who forms the General Assembly. You are treating it as tough it were the Political Committee of a Disciplined Party. But that reflectsd a drama you are playing out in your own mind. When C.L.R. James & his followers took their tendency to the SWP and lost, they should have simply bowed their heads & submitted?!!!!!!

It appears that OWS does not systematically expel dissidents. That opens the way for tendencies to follow Draper's (and Lenin's) policy: Neither split at any cost nor unity at any cost. Maintain your position and push for it subsequent 'elections.' In grossly opportunist parties it becomes unity at any cost. In ultra-left 'disciplined' parties scuh as the SWP it becomes Split at any Cost to maintain "correctness" of principle.

Anything anyone does within the large cluster of activities which characterize the present moment (some within OWS, some overlapping OWS, some independent) it would be foolish for the unformed tendencies among them either to go off into a corner and propagate (to whom) their 'correct' line OR to submit (to what! The daydreams of a wandering Economist?). Stay together, follow your own provisional principles, see what happens, discuss the results with other tendencies slopping around as you are. Discussion and debate continue, but under present conditions do not, should not, and will not reach a point at which anyone does anything as "Submit" to a fantasized 'Center."

Carrol



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list