[lbo-talk] Graber on consensus

[shag carpet bomb]

i'd also point out that, as Graeber notes, the bulk of what gets done in 
direct action circles is done by women. from my perspective, direct 
action/anarchist feminists also play a significant role in all the efforts 
to keep social movements going these past forty years. It's the radical 
(anarchist inspired) feminists who, instead of retreating to the office or 
academe, moved into local communities, set up shops in rape crisis centers, 
women's health centers, nurse-midwife collectives, alternative medicine, 
books stores, DIY _____ fill in the blank. As such, they end up have a 
great deal of influence on the way a broad activist public sees and 
understand feminist analysis.

At 10:57 AM 3/4/2013, Carrol Cox wrote:
>Andie N: > I haven't read Graber, and I suppose I must, but whatever
>illumination he's
> > offered anyone, including anarchist activists, has to have been recent,
>and
> > important movements have been going on without him for the last 40 years.
> > For a Maoist if some sort, Carroll, it's surprising that you ignore the
>major
> > revolution of the last 40 years, the women's movement. What happened to
> > the other half the sky?
>
>The women's movement may yet become one of the kernels of a growing left.
>But the "Movement" (or coherent collection of movements) that I look for
>will consist of masses in movement for radical transformations of specific
>features of capitalism (e.g. withdrawal of u.s. troops from abroad; stopping
>of fracking & tar-sands mining; retreat at leas of the massive increase in
>repressive power of the state). And it will contain growing forces demanding
>"too much democracy -- i.e. for the overthrow of capitalism. My assumption
>is that Bellamy Foster is correct: Global Warming must be stopped in the
>next generation. (It may already be too late, but what the hell.) I also
>assume that capitalism is incapable of NOT growing. It is NECESSITY, not
>hope for something better, that is the primary motor force of
>anti-capitalist growth.
>
>I have been and am an admirer of Mao & the Chinese Revolution. But the first
>thing to learn from that revolution is the contrasting meaning of "thought"
>and "theory"; "Maoism" is incoherent, since Mao was not a theorist and he
>(and his comrades) focused on the demands of China, producing thought that
>does not travel over space and time.   I suppose if any document
>encapsulates my thought it is the 1898 Stuttgart speeches of Rosa Luxemburg.
>
>You've been away during a period in which my thought changed significantly,
>and I became _more_ convinced that the complete overthrow of capitalism was
>a necessity for human survival, making irrelevant the questions of whether
>that was possible or whether the results would be (in themselves) desirable.
>A return to feudalism or palace economies would be preferable to the
>continued existence of capitalist relations of production.
>
>Carrol
>
>
>___________________________________
>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)