12 Suggestions On "What to do"

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10592
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: 12 Suggestions On "What to do"

Post by blindpig » Fri Jan 10, 2020 1:34 pm

Two Americas
01-16-2007, 09:31 PM

"A Day Without Immigrants" Comments?
It has always been a mystery to me why white activists have so little interest in the immigrant marches. "Not our issue" I am assuming is the problem. That is the danger of issue-oriented causes. I think that if those were white marchers, making the same statements, white activists would be able to connect.

It seems to me that there is a way in which it is all the same issue, all the same cause, just in different guises. Issues have a place - as flash points, as points of entry for people. But is not the root cause for all of these issues the same? Do we not want to build a mass movement of all of people in the working class? If white anti-war activists are unable to see their interests represented in the immigrant marches, then why are they so surprised that most of the population cannot identify with their anti-war cause?

The general public is no more apathetic about the anti-war marches than the anti-war people are about the immigrant marches. The immigrants are speaking much more to the root causes, and are speaking of much broader and more powerful principles than the anti-war movement is, so the anti-war protesters have even less excuse for sitting on the sidelines when the immigrants march than the general public does for sitting on the sidelines during the anti-war marches.

The war is a particularly bad thing to build a movement around, because it won't last, and once it ends the movement collapses. The general oppression of the working class will still be there long after the war is over.
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10592
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: 12 Suggestions On "What to do"

Post by blindpig » Fri Jan 10, 2020 1:37 pm

PPLE
01-16-2007, 10:18 PM

The general public is no more apathetic about the anti-war marches than the anti-war people are about the immigrant marches...
The war is a particularly bad thing to build a movement around, because it won't last, and once it ends the movement collapses. The general oppression of the working class will still be there long after the war is over.

Mmm Hmm
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10592
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: 12 Suggestions On "What to do"

Post by blindpig » Fri Jan 10, 2020 1:39 pm

Kid of the Black Hole
01-16-2007, 10:31 PM
"A Day Without Immigrants" Comments?
It has always been a mystery to me why white activists have so little interest in the immigrant marches. "Not our issue" I am assuming is the problem. That is the danger of issue-oriented causes. I think that if those were white marchers, making the same statements, white activists would be able to connect.

It seems to me that there is a way in which it is all the same issue, all the same cause, just in different guises. Issues have a place - as flash points, as points of entry for people. But is not the root cause for all of these issues the same? Do we not want to build a mass movement of all of people in the working class? If white anti-war activists are unable to see their interests represented in the immigrant marches, then why are they so surprised that most of the population cannot identify with their anti-war cause?

The general public is no more apathetic about the anti-war marches than the anti-war people are about the immigrant marches. The immigrants are speaking much more to the root causes, and are speaking of much broader and more powerful principles than the anti-war movement is, so the anti-war protesters have even less excuse for sitting on the sidelines when the immigrants march than the general public does for sitting on the sidelines during the anti-war marches.

The war is a particularly bad thing to build a movement around, because it won't last, and once it ends the movement collapses. The general oppression of the working class will still be there long after the war is over.
Not all of the pristine folks are staying uninvolved. If I remember Zach de la Rocha from Rage Against The Machine was leading a protest for immigrant Hotel workers in California recently for instance.

What he said at their last ever show:


So who went out and joined us for the Democratic National Convention? I've never seen so many fucking cops in my whole life. It's like everybody knows that everybody went out there, the only thing we were out there to do is express how much we hate both the Democrats and Republicans because they sold this fucking country out. And by expressing our rights to resist, what do they do, they open fire on the crowd. I don't care what fucking television station said the violence was caused by the people at the concert, those motherfuckers unloaded on this crowd. And I think it's ridiculous considering, you know, none of us had rubber bullets, none of us had M16s, none of us had billy clubs, none of us had face shields. All we had was our fists, our voices, our microphones, our guitars, our drums, and anytime we get beaten in the streets for protesting, we take it to the court system, and the court system don't wanna hear it. Look what happened to Amadou Diallo in New York, they shot that brother 41 times and let all four officers go. It's time for a new type of action in this country.
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10592
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: 12 Suggestions On "What to do"

Post by blindpig » Fri Jan 10, 2020 1:43 pm

chlamor
01-16-2007, 10:59 PM
Not sure how far this goes... If you are talking about a political outlet like PI, certainly this is true. If you are talking about a demonstration, there are too many "issues". Coalitions are about one issue... such as Iraq. Conflating the two seems to be one of the symptoms of "primitiveness" in the current "movement".
Two things I see. First, the upper class bias in the activist community, secondly the faction that seeks to convert people to a new awareness or enlighten people. There is only a tiny percentage of the population that is interested in becoming enlightened. For most of the people, it is meaningless at best. Gatherings of like-minded people, and efforts at converting people to be like us is the main theme that I hear from the activist community. That can only serve the ruling class.

Activists want the stupid TV watching WalMart shopping rednecks to wise up and become like them – beautiful and gentle and peaceful and enlightened – altogether superior beings, don't you know – and fill the ranks of mass demonstrations so that the activists can “get what they want.” Never mind what the stupid rednecks want. These sentiments are expressed everyday in activist meetings and on the liberal boards - “how can we get what we want?” and “what will it take to wake the people up?”

In other words, the activists want the people to serve the, and the activists want to be an elite aristocracy that decides what happens – for people's own good, which they presumably are too stupid to recognize.

The proper relationship for the intellectuals and activists from the working class is to place themselves into the service of the blue collar people, not try to get the blue collar people to serve them. That is what we need to get enlightened about, and enlightenment about political and social problems is only of real value to the extent that it is useful in raising the conditions – not the spirituality – of the broad mass of people. If, on the other hand, enlightenment continues to be a matter of self-actualization and self-fulfillment - “what we want”and “my personal values” and “my choices” - enlightenment remains at best irrelevant politically.
That's pretty much on the mark. It manifests itself it so many ways.

At all the anti-war demos and vigils around here one of the often asked questions is "How do we get more black people involved?" Well of course the presumption behind that is a bit of a "Why won't they come join us?" type o' thing. Rarely, and only from the radical fringe, is the question put back, "Hey where were you at the protests for lead abatement last Wednesday?" with the answer always being, "We didn't know about that!?" With the follow up being "Yea, I know don't ya' see!?"

Well anyway that's all I have to say on that.

Just to let ya' know my computer is on the fritz and I'm rather ambivalent about getting repaired or getting another. So it's hard for me to post very often. Damn beast is freezing up big time.

It's all got to happen in the streets.
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10592
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: 12 Suggestions On "What to do"

Post by blindpig » Fri Jan 10, 2020 1:45 pm

anaxarchos
01-17-2007, 01:41 AM
Not sure how far this goes... If you are talking about a political outlet like PI, certainly this is true. If you are talking about a demonstration, there are too many "issues". Coalitions are about one issue... such as Iraq. Conflating the two seems to be one of the symptoms of "primitiveness" in the current "movement".
Two things I see. First, the upper class bias in the activist community, secondly the faction that seeks to convert people to a new awareness or enlighten people. There is only a tiny percentage of the population that is interested in becoming enlightened. For most of the people, it is meaningless at best. Gatherings of like-minded people, and efforts at converting people to be like us is the main theme that I hear from the activist community. That can only serve the ruling class.

Activists want the stupid TV watching WalMart shopping rednecks to wise up and become like them – beautiful and gentle and peaceful and enlightened – altogether superior beings, don't you know – and fill the ranks of mass demonstrations so that the activists can “get what they want.” Never mind what the stupid rednecks want. These sentiments are expressed everyday in activist meetings and on the liberal boards - “how can we get what we want?” and “what will it take to wake the people up?”

In other words, the activists want the people to serve the, and the activists want to be an elite aristocracy that decides what happens – for people's own good, which they presumably are too stupid to recognize.

The proper relationship for the intellectuals and activists from the working class is to place themselves into the service of the blue collar people, not try to get the blue collar people to serve them. That is what we need to get enlightened about, and enlightenment about political and social problems is only of real value to the extent that it is useful in raising the conditions – not the spirituality – of the broad mass of people. If, on the other hand, enlightenment continues to be a matter of self-actualization and self-fulfillment - “what we want”and “my personal values” and “my choices” - enlightenment remains at best irrelevant politically.
That's pretty much on the mark. It manifests itself it so many ways.

At all the anti-war demos and vigils around here one of the often asked questions is "How do we get more black people involved?" Well of course the presumption behind that is a bit of a "Why won't they come join us?" type o' thing. Rarely, and only from the radical fringe, is the question put back, "Hey where were you at the protests for lead abatement last Wednesday?" with the answer always being, "We didn't know about that!?" With the follow up being "Yea, I know don't ya' see!?"

Well anyway that's all I have to say on that.

Just to let ya' know my computer is on the fritz and I'm rather ambivalent about getting repaired or getting another. So it's hard for me to post very often. Damn beast is freezing up big time.

It's all got to happen in the streets.
Sorry to give you trouble on yet another board and when your computer is on the fritz to boot, but... what you just said is a complete crock (with all due respect). Perhaps I am misunderstanding so let me lay it out.

1. Since the time that British textile workers went on strike to prevent the British government from siding with the Confederacy during the American Civil War, despite the fact that this meant that they would be in opposition to their own narrow interests as well, resistence to the external imperial adventures of ones "own" country has been the most important and legitimate "litmus test" of the "maturity" of the left in all imperialist countries. This is the special responsibility that comes from living in the "belly of the beast". Having an understanding of the nature of imperialism only deepens that responsibility. The convenience of organizing around that issue is entirely secondary.

This does not mean that one has to meet this responsibility soley on the basis of emotion or morality or reckless abandon of long term goals or anything else. It also does not mean that this is all that one does or, even, that it is the most important thing that one does. It does mean that this responsibility fundamentally cuts across "issues" as they are understood in American politics today.

2. The Iraq War is the decision point for this phase of American imperialism. It will have significant impact on the nature of direct U.S. military "intervention", and domestic support for it, for the next 20 or 30 years. Whatever may happen inside the United States, the outcome will heavily influence what happens in the rest of the world. That is why the partisans of this war are willing to take such extreme risks to prolong or deepen it. That is what makes the ever increasing opposition of the American populace, despite the absence of a "mass" anti-war movement, so important. That is why the open treason of the Democrats is so obvious and in itself creates the opportunity for a very different politics. In these ways, the Iraq War has similarities to the First World War and Vietnam and Algeria and other epic contests that define the answer to the question, "Which side are you on?"

3. The Anti-War Movement, as it presently defines itself, does not "own" the Iraq War. How they act, "subjectively", changes nothing. They can ignore all demonstrations on lead abatement and drive SUVs and welcome global warming and you may still decide to work with them. Alternatively, they may all embrace a simpler life with a very small personal footprint, and you may still decide to have nothing to do with them. The decision is based on two criteria: the relative importance of the issue based on your world view and your assessment of whether that movement as it is presently constituted helps or hurts the advancement of that issue. In truth, all of this only answers the practical question of who you decide to work with.

In fact, the absence of black people in anti-war activities (if true), may well be a reason to try something a little bit differently. Anti-imperialism, in one form or another, has been a foundation of the modern Civil Rights movement since well before King's famous speech and the importance of it is very explicitly underlined in virtually the entire spectrum of the movement from Julian Bond to King to Malcom to Huey to even CORE in their social chauvinist phase (when they were backing UNITA), and this continues to the present. I would also be very surprised if the significance of the Iraq War was lost on a large part of the Immigrant Rights movement.

On the other hand, opposition to the Iraq War may well, and does in fact, include suburbanites, liberals, "activists", and even a section of the actual capitalist class. That in itself is both a reason for "coalition" and a very good argument for not getting completely subsumed in such a coalition... i.e. to act with two seperate objectives in mind.

Like I say, I may have misunderstood. I've been doin' that a lot lately. If so, please ignore this attempt at "intervention" to keep you from twisting your logic into a pretzel (I can't fucking believe how "sensitive" I have become since I started posting on PI).

Either way though, fix your computer. I have a feeling this chat is only starting.
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10592
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: 12 Suggestions On "What to do"

Post by blindpig » Fri Jan 10, 2020 1:48 pm

chlamor
01-17-2007, 09:25 PM
Not sure how far this goes... If you are talking about a political outlet like PI, certainly this is true. If you are talking about a demonstration, there are too many "issues". Coalitions are about one issue... such as Iraq. Conflating the two seems to be one of the symptoms of "primitiveness" in the current "movement".
Two things I see. First, the upper class bias in the activist community, secondly the faction that seeks to convert people to a new awareness or enlighten people. There is only a tiny percentage of the population that is interested in becoming enlightened. For most of the people, it is meaningless at best. Gatherings of like-minded people, and efforts at converting people to be like us is the main theme that I hear from the activist community. That can only serve the ruling class.

Activists want the stupid TV watching WalMart shopping rednecks to wise up and become like them – beautiful and gentle and peaceful and enlightened – altogether superior beings, don't you know – and fill the ranks of mass demonstrations so that the activists can “get what they want.” Never mind what the stupid rednecks want. These sentiments are expressed everyday in activist meetings and on the liberal boards - “how can we get what we want?” and “what will it take to wake the people up?”

In other words, the activists want the people to serve the, and the activists want to be an elite aristocracy that decides what happens – for people's own good, which they presumably are too stupid to recognize.

The proper relationship for the intellectuals and activists from the working class is to place themselves into the service of the blue collar people, not try to get the blue collar people to serve them. That is what we need to get enlightened about, and enlightenment about political and social problems is only of real value to the extent that it is useful in raising the conditions – not the spirituality – of the broad mass of people. If, on the other hand, enlightenment continues to be a matter of self-actualization and self-fulfillment - “what we want”and “my personal values” and “my choices” - enlightenment remains at best irrelevant politically.
That's pretty much on the mark. It manifests itself it so many ways.

At all the anti-war demos and vigils around here one of the often asked questions is "How do we get more black people involved?" Well of course the presumption behind that is a bit of a "Why won't they come join us?" type o' thing. Rarely, and only from the radical fringe, is the question put back, "Hey where were you at the protests for lead abatement last Wednesday?" with the answer always being, "We didn't know about that!?" With the follow up being "Yea, I know don't ya' see!?"

Well anyway that's all I have to say on that.

Just to let ya' know my computer is on the fritz and I'm rather ambivalent about getting repaired or getting another. So it's hard for me to post very often. Damn beast is freezing up big time.

It's all got to happen in the streets.
Sorry to give you trouble on yet another board and when your computer is on the fritz to boot, but... what you just said is a complete crock (with all due respect). Perhaps I am misunderstanding so let me lay it out.

1. Since the time that British textile workers went on strike to prevent the British government from siding with the Confederacy during the American Civil War, despite the fact that this meant that they would be in opposition to their own narrow interests as well, resistence to the external imperial adventures of ones "own" country has been the most important and legitimate "litmus test" of the "maturity" of the left in all imperialist countries. This is the special responsibility that comes from living in the "belly of the beast". Having an understanding of the nature of imperialism only deepens that responsibility. The convenience of organizing around that issue is entirely secondary.

This does not mean that one has to meet this responsibility soley on the basis of emotion or morality or reckless abandon of long term goals or anything else. It also does not mean that this is all that one does or, even, that it is the most important thing that one does. It does mean that this responsibility fundamentally cuts across "issues" as they are understood in American politics today.

2. The Iraq War is the decision point for this phase of American imperialism. It will have significant impact on the nature of direct U.S. military "intervention", and domestic support for it, for the next 20 or 30 years. Whatever may happen inside the United States, the outcome will heavily influence what happens in the rest of the world. That is why the partisans of this war are willing to take such extreme risks to prolong or deepen it. That is what makes the ever increasing opposition of the American populace, despite the absence of a "mass" anti-war movement, so important. That is why the open treason of the Democrats is so obvious and in itself creates the opportunity for a very different politics. In these ways, the Iraq War has similarities to the First World War and Vietnam and Algeria and other epic contests that define the answer to the question, "Which side are you on?"

3. The Anti-War Movement, as it presently defines itself, does not "own" the Iraq War. How they act, "subjectively", changes nothing. They can ignore all demonstrations on lead abatement and drive SUVs and welcome global warming and you may still decide to work with them. Alternatively, they may all embrace a simpler life with a very small personal footprint, and you may still decide to have nothing to do with them. The decision is based on two criteria: the relative importance of the issue based on your world view and your assessment of whether that movement as it is presently constituted helps or hurts the advancement of that issue. In truth, all of this only answers the practical question of who you decide to work with.

In fact, the absence of black people in anti-war activities (if true), may well be a reason to try something a little bit differently. Anti-imperialism, in one form or another, has been a foundation of the modern Civil Rights movement since well before King's famous speech and the importance of it is very explicitly underlined in virtually the entire spectrum of the movement from Julian Bond to King to Malcom to Huey to even CORE in their social chauvinist phase (when they were backing UNITA), and this continues to the present. I would also be very surprised if the significance of the Iraq War was lost on a large part of the Immigrant Rights movement.

On the other hand, opposition to the Iraq War may well, and does in fact, include suburbanites, liberals, "activists", and even a section of the actual capitalist class. That in itself is both a reason for "coalition" and a very good argument for not getting completely subsumed in such a coalition... i.e. to act with two seperate objectives in mind.

Like I say, I may have misunderstood. I've been doin' that a lot lately. If so, please ignore this attempt at "intervention" to keep you from twisting your logic into a pretzel (I can't fucking believe how "sensitive" I have become since I started posting on PI).

Either way though, fix your computer. I have a feeling this chat is only starting.
I'd say you misunderstood what I wrote with a caveat that what I wrote was so fuzzy as to allow for such a thing.

In short what I'm talking about is really simple. It gets to the core of white liberalism and paternalism. It goes to always talking at "The folk" rather than participating and listening as well as being involved with the struggles of others.
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10592
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: 12 Suggestions On "What to do"

Post by blindpig » Fri Jan 10, 2020 1:49 pm

anaxarchos
01-18-2007, 12:21 AM
I'd say you misunderstood what I wrote with a caveat that what I wrote was so fuzzy as to allow for such a thing.

In short what I'm talking about is really simple. It gets to the core of white liberalism and paternalism. It goes to always talking at "The folk" rather than participating and listening as well as being involved with the struggles of others.
OK, I stand corrected.

Meanwhile, liberals would listen better if the "folk" had really big guns...

Image
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10592
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: 12 Suggestions On "What to do"

Post by blindpig » Fri Jan 10, 2020 1:51 pm

Mairead
01-18-2007, 06:19 AM
"A Day Without Immigrants" Comments?
It has always been a mystery to me why white activists have so little interest in the immigrant marches. "Not our issue" I am assuming is the problem.
My guess is that it's deeper. As long as capital is free of national boundaries but people aren't, immigration is a threat to working people. The people who once only did stoop-labor and lawn care are now putting construction tradespeople out of work. And they proudly boast of a birthrate in the US 2.5X that of non-latin-culture people. But it's not pc to be opposed to 'those poor, noble brown people yearning to breathe free'. Ruling-class propaganda wins again.



The war is a particularly bad thing to build a movement around, because it won't last, and once it ends the movement collapses. The general oppression of the working class will still be there long after the war is over.
I think the idea is to have a new issue ready for when the war starts going away.
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10592
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: 12 Suggestions On "What to do"

Post by blindpig » Fri Jan 10, 2020 1:54 pm

Two Americas
01-18-2007, 11:58 AM
My guess is that it's deeper. As long as capital is free of national boundaries but people aren't, immigration is a threat to working people.
I mean the activists.

I think the idea is to have a new issue ready for when the war starts going away.
I don't think that is possible.
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10592
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: 12 Suggestions On "What to do"

Post by blindpig » Fri Jan 10, 2020 1:56 pm

Mairead
01-18-2007, 12:04 PM
I mean the activists.
My assumption is that, since most of them aren't only stupid in specific ways, they perceive the threat too. But their pc imperative is in conflict with their good sense. So they can neither support nor oppose.

It's a theory at least :)



I think the idea is to have a new issue ready for when the war starts going away.
I don't think that is possible.
Why not?
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

Post Reply