Yoshie Furuhashi wrote:
>
> Back when I was active in Solidarity, I proposed that, after the 2004
> elections, we work with other socialists and leftists who believe the
> Democratic Party will not help end the war and together organize a
> national conference so we won't be so ill-organized and ill-focused.
> For various reasons, internal and external, that didn't happen.
>
I think these efforts are commendable and necessary. What is also
missing is for a way to get ordinary people to get involved in some way,
if only to form a community. Not every one has the dedication (and in
some cases, the time, money and/or energy) to participate in meetings
and planning. The "netroots" (etc) provide a means for regular folks to
congregate/communicate and in some cases even plan: MoveOn is a good
example. In contrast, most of are holed up in mailing lists that have
little visibility (no offence!).
I doubt we will ever have the following that MoveOn has, nor the timing
(their birth and rise coincided with significant among Democrats,
especially over the 2000 POTUS election). But even without such
crippling factors, we seem hobbled by everything from
ideological/theoretical purism to intellectual individualism. Part of
the problem might be that in the West, leftists with a voice seem to
reside in academia, where they are already part of a particular network,
set of practices, etc. The few voices outside academia (or even within)
that are capable of getting out are either involved in internal
skirmishes (such as Yoshie vs LBO on Iran), marginalised (Chomsky & Co)
or co-opted (e.g: Juan Cole). On the ground, labour is in an even more
disorganised state, attached in mortal fear (it seems) to the Democrats
(even as a large part of its membership votes GOP).
This sort of disarray amidst the left provides a ripe opportunity for
"moderates" (liberals, progressives, whatever name is safe today from
right-wing vilification) to misappropriate the platform.
--ravi
