Re: Re: Re: Speaking of What's Left
Ian Murray wrote: > > Here's one for penner's. How do we get Michael Perelman's new book > widely talked about? Maybe he and Doug can do a tag team book tour > when Doug's done with his. Buy lotto tickets for financing > purposes. > one useful thing to do might be to submit reviews on amazon.com and bn.com. --ravi
Re: Re: Speaking of What's Left
- Original Message - From: "Ian Murray" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Glad you are grabbing the torch of practical-critical activity, Ian. Take it and >run with it ! > > > > Charles > > > = > > Now if I could just figure out a way to get the geniuses on this list on the Oprah >Winfrey and Larry King shows, along > with a steady stream of profiles in People magazine, we'd be on our way. Maybe I >should be realistic and start with > Dennis Miller on HBO.! :-) > > Ian Here's one for penner's. How do we get Michael Perelman's new book widely talked about? Maybe he and Doug can do a tag team book tour when Doug's done with his. Buy lotto tickets for financing purposes. Ian
Re: RE: Re: Speaking of What's Left
- Original Message - From: "Max Sawicky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > [Guess the author...] > > > I agree with the first sentence of that essay. > > I don't know the author, but whoever it is, he or > she is confused. The smorgasbord of groups > and the implied atomization of program and > politics is the fruit of democracy. People vote > with their feet. Participation is nice, and so is > unity, but one doesn't necessarily promote the > other. > > The description of SDS/SNCC is all wet, but there > isn't much point in unpacking all that. > > Instead of counting young people, I should probably > count the Palm Pilots. > > mbs * - Original Message - From: "Devine, James" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > of course, such decentralized groups as the SDS "did their own thing" one > time [1969] in the form of the "days of rage," in which a bunch of well-fed > white suburbanites went crazy in the streets of Chicago, in hopes that the > Black Youth would Rise Up and join them, overthrowing the System. > > I like this statement's emphasis on from-the-bottom organizing, but > decentralization isn't always what it's advertised to be. > JD > == And the writer is.Nathan Newman!
Re: Re: Speaking of What's Left
Ian Murray wrote: > > > The Sixties youth rejected the centralized, > bureaucratic democratic decision-making of the unions, > parties, and the established civil rights organizations (the > legacy of another generation of young activists). Instead, > organizations like Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) And the result was (for the most part) that the political structure of SDS both at the local and national level was that of an ensemble of high-school social cliques. The difference from a bureaucratic organization was that it is easier to hold a bureaucracy responsible than it is to hold a (partly invisible) clique responsible. Almost all real decisions in SDS (nationally and locally) were made behind closed doors in informal conversation among non-responsible leaders -- most but not all of whom did not even themselves know that that was what they were doing. Open Bureaucracy vs Bureacracy behind a Screen of Participatory democracy. Carrol
RE: RE: RE: Speaking of What's Left
Horrors! how could I confuse the Larouchites with the PLP? suffering from early-onset Alzheimer's, Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] & http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine > -Original Message- > From: Max Sawicky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 8:21 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [PEN-L:24581] RE: RE: Speaking of What's Left > > > N.B. You are sectually confused. > > Challenge is Progressive Labor Party. > > mbs > > > > speaking of excitement, Max has an article in the issue of > CHALLENGE that > > came today, something about "fighting recession," even though all > > Those Who > > Know are sure that the recession is dead and gone. (I have > to check to see > > whether this is the CHALLENGE that is published by M.E. > Sharpe or it's the > > one published by the Larouchite U.S. Labor Party. I'll be > back to you on > > this.) > > Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] & http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine >
RE: RE: Speaking of What's Left
N.B. You are sectually confused. Challenge is Progressive Labor Party. mbs > speaking of excitement, Max has an article in the issue of CHALLENGE that > came today, something about "fighting recession," even though all > Those Who > Know are sure that the recession is dead and gone. (I have to check to see > whether this is the CHALLENGE that is published by M.E. Sharpe or it's the > one published by the Larouchite U.S. Labor Party. I'll be back to you on > this.) > Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] & http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
RE: Re: Speaking of What's Left
> > >REGISTER FOR CONFERENCE AND DINNER ONLINE AT > > >http://www.ourfuture.org. > > Please count the young people for us Max: . . . > grassroots empowerment. Ultimately, it is up to our > generation to restore "one person, one vote" and get "the > movement" back on the track of true democracy. > > [Guess the author...] I agree with the first sentence of that essay. I don't know the author, but whoever it is, he or she is confused. The smorgasbord of groups and the implied atomization of program and politics is the fruit of democracy. People vote with their feet. Participation is nice, and so is unity, but one doesn't necessarily promote the other. The description of SDS/SNCC is all wet, but there isn't much point in unpacking all that. Instead of counting young people, I should probably count the Palm Pilots. mbs
RE: Re: Speaking of What's Left
Anonymous wrote:>... organizations like Students for a Democratic Society (SDS)and the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC)believed in the ideal of engaged "participatory democracy." They believed this was more likely to occur in smaller, more decentralized organizations where everyone could "do their own thing." These smaller groups would also allow young people to overcome the racism, sexism, imperialism, and other shortcomings of the older, top-down organizations who refused to respond to growing demands from the grassroots.< of course, such decentralized groups as the SDS "did their own thing" one time [1969] in the form of the "days of rage," in which a bunch of well-fed white suburbanites went crazy in the streets of Chicago, in hopes that the Black Youth would Rise Up and join them, overthrowing the System. I like this statement's emphasis on from-the-bottom organizing, but decentralization isn't always what it's advertised to be. JD
