I thought that we had put this to bed. On Thu, Nov 29, 2001 at 08:43:51PM -0800, Gar Lipow wrote: > > In response to a post by Carroll, I said: > > >We>need to be able to answer the question: "what would you do if you were > >in charge?". > >> > > > > Devine, James wrote in reply: > > > > I sometimes say "this is what I would do if I were in charge" (such as not > > terror-bombing Afghanistan) but I immediately qualify this by stating that > > it's impossible that such policies would be implemented given the current > > balance of political power. The implication is that we need to change the > > balance of power (organize!). This is simplistic, but it's good enough for > > bumper-stickers. > > > > Right, you are making explicit something that is implicit in any radical > political criticism -- that we should seek change in the political > balance of power. > > > When you do this people always wonder if it is going to be a "meet the > old boss, same as the new boss" situation. Or even more frightening, > will radical change or revolution make things worse rather than better? > That is why there is an obligation to not merely to oppose what is > wrong, but to suggest how things will change if we win our demands. > There are cases , like Vietnam, when a purely negative program is > enough. The demand to "get out of Vietnam" was an improvement for both > the U.S. and Vietnam. But in a case like 911, I don't think a purely > negative program is possible. Thousands of people in the U.S. were > killed in the course of a few hours. > > Carroll has the response that if he were in charge he would be a > different person. But he is making demands that also require a drastic > power shift. Why can he handle the negative hypothetical, but not the > positive one? The ability to win negative demands in a case like this > would both imply and require the ability to win positive demands as > well. To refuse to imagine some positive alternative is not a > revolutionary defeatist, nor a pacifist position. It is not pessimism of > the intellect, optimism of the will. It is despair, an endless black > hole, a failure of the imagination. >
-- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
