Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] Michael Moore: Capitalism has proven it's failed
>> There are roughly two big aspects. Is the system broken or "evil" in Moore's terminology ? They have to be convinced that that is true before they look to the second aspect, what is the solution. Moore is making a big step in massively broadcasting the claim that the first aspect is true.<< Comment Our working class is not uniform in its economic life. The moment this movie is viewed by millions, the ideological and politically ante is upped. My best guess is the moment this movie is viewed by millions is the moment it becomes outdated and no longer capable of further developing the consciousness of the workers. This is not a bad thing. America needs a Third Edition of the American Revolution: Proletarian Revolution. In this sense, we are not very different from the early abolitionists campaigning against slavery in 1850. There were different political wings of the abolitionist movement. Some of us occupy a similar space to David Walker and “Walkers Appeal” only at a much higher level of development of the productive forces. However, there is room for all aspects of the abolitionists movement. Some people are fighting to teach people city farming, others against evictions; for food stamps and so on. Today, the need is to abolish capitalism according to the wing of the movement I am in. We have no problem stating this in clear terms. Slavery - wage slavery, needs to be abolished. Down with the new wage slavery and the Slave - or rather, Financial Oligarchy. Moore’s Capitalism a love story - in this context, might turn of to be akin to “Uncle Toms Cabin,” which came after Walkers Appeal. Uncle Tom’s Cabin was so powerful because of the decades of work of the abolitionists in all political wings of the anti-slavery movement. On segment of the movement sought to end slavery by purchasing the slaves and compensating the slave owner. Some felt relocating the slaves in Africa was a good plan. Moore has his point of view. You have your point of view and I have my point of view. Every layer of the working class relates to the system different. A layer of workers are economically secure. On the other hand as a retired worker my benefits have been cut, but not nephews, a skilled tradesman in auto. The retired workers face an immediate struggle with the government and state. There is no way for Chrysler to meet our needs. The logic of capital has caused the struggle of the retired workers to leap outside the bound of employer-employee relations. This motion as it gathers steam is going to change the union movement and make it more oriented towards labor rather than trade as specific industry. Those workers increasingly shut out of the system is my choice of work area, because they are generally more receptive to communist - abolitionist, thought. Some of these modern slaves of capital will inevitably go the way of John Brown. Some the way of Frederick Douglas. Moore’s movie - which I have not yet seen, widens and harmonizes the dialogue nationally. The capitalist class needs to be arrested by the working class; a real citizen arrest. Our audience is huge and our resources tiny. The way of David Walker seems my individual fit and I like it. In the spirit of David Walker, Proletarians Unite, we have nothing to lose but our chains. WL ___ Marxism-Thaxis mailing list Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis
[Marxism-Thaxis] The Waxing and Waning of Americ a’s Political Right
The New York Times / September 29, 2009 Books of The Times The Waxing and Waning of America’s Political Right By JACKSON LEARS THE DEATH OF CONSERVATISM By Sam Tanenhaus 123 pages. Random House. $17. One puzzling feature of American politics is that the people who call themselves conservatives seldom want to conserve anything. The modern conservative movement promotes radical transformation while ignoring classical conservative ideas — for example, Edmund Burke’s respect for established institutions and customs, for continuity with tradition and for incremental change. The recent history of the American right, writes Sam Tanenhaus, involves the triumph of “movement conservatism” over the Burkean version. In his view “the paradox of the modern Right” is that “its drive for power has steered it onto a path that has become profoundly and defiantly un-conservative,” and that has finally led to electoral disaster, political irrelevance and “rigor mortis.” “The Death of Conservatism” is a persuasive intellectual history of the right, but it omits a lot of institutional history and ignores money and power altogether. A fuller history would have paid attention to Lewis F. Powell Jr.’s 1971 memorandum to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, “Attack on the American Free Enterprise System.” Powell, soon to be a Supreme Court justice, urged friends of capitalism to retake command of public discourse by financing think tanks, reshaping mass media and seeking influence in universities and the judiciary. This did happen in the decades to follow. What had once been far-right fantasies — abolishing welfare, privatizing Social Security, deregulating banking, embracing preventive war — became legitimate policy positions, emanating from institutions that cost a lot of money to maintain: the Heritage Foundation, the American Enterprise Institute, the Fox News Network, as well as numerous corporate lobbying organizations and university professorships. Money talked. None of this ideological infrastructure has disappeared. Whether the Obama administration can stand up to its power remains to be seen. Despite popular support for a robust public option in health care coverage and even a single-payer system, the airwaves are pervaded by the buzzwords of the market — competition, incentives, consumer choice. Foreign policy, too, remains dominated by right-wing assumptions. Whatever President Obama’s intentions (and it would be a mistake to underestimate him), he will find the imperial presidency difficult to repudiate. The bureaucratic labyrinths of the national security state will be dismantled no more easily than the hundreds of American military bases around the world, many of them shrouded in secrecy. Nor will it be easy to challenge the assumptions that underlie empire: the humanitarian dreams of interventionists in Mr. Obama’s own party and the relentless Republican demands for toughness. Here as elsewhere, the right wields far more power than its weak popular support warrants. Reports of its death have been exaggerated. Jackson Lears is editor in chief of Raritan: A Quarterly Review and the author, most recently, of “Rebirth of a Nation: The Making of Modern America, 1877-1920.” Copyright 2009 The New York Times Company ___ Marxism-Thaxis mailing list Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis
Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] Michael Moore: Capitalism has proven it's failed
On 9/30/09, waistli...@aol.com wrote: > >>> So, this layer of workers is asking a sophisticated question, a > question about "the system", to the communists and socialists "if you > guys are so smart what kind of system do you propose and how will it > operate generally operate ?", but they do not have a clue as to what > the word "communist "means ? That doesn't ring true. First of all , > you have been talking to them for a while, so they already have heard > of the term communist.<< > > > Comment > > You miss the point. The point is “what is the solution.” I will try and > write clearer. Other layers of the workers ask the same question. Take > health care. “How will universal health care be paid for.” Another layer of > the workers do not care how something is paid for and simply want access to > socially necessary means of life. > > *** There is more than one point. There are roughly two big aspects. Is the system broken or "evil" in Moore's terminology ? They have to be convinced that that is true before they look to the second aspect, what is the solution. Moore is making a big step in massively broadcasting the claim that the first aspect is true > > >>> When I work with your comrades fighting for water as a human right for > low-income > Detroiters or stopping the evictions of a bunch of people in an apartment > building in Highland Park, with me representing the tenants, or Welfare > Rights in general they deal with all kinds of literary petty bourgeois > intellectuals. <<< > > Comment > > I speak for myself and myself only. I meet all kinds of people as a way of > life. My “baby” - choice of work, is literature production with others. > Here is an example. Both of us were involved in the last city election. The > literature I passed out for that election was non-communist, because the > candidate I was supporting is not a communist. However, after the election > and during it I was involved in other activity where I could utilize a > revolutionary press and Marxists literature. > ** I was responding to your reference to your comrades. > > >>> Actually, if you look I didn't say mass _media_. I said just mass work. > The monopoly media is very corrupt on these issues. That's part of why > Moore's breakthrough in it , saying we need to replace capitalism with > democracy, is so extraordinary. <<< > > Comment > > Without question Moore’s movie as mass media is extraordinary. Because we > were speaking of a movie opening nationwide I took the conversation to be > about mass media. I do not do work in the mass media. How one identify > themselves and their terminology is personal with political connotations. If > you > choose to speak in terms of other countries that is fine. All of us are not > the same and going to approach things different. My goal is to seek out > those individuals interested in revolutionary thought. When I was a young man > the writings of Engel’s changed my life. I have a feeling Engel’s will > impact this generation of young people the same way. Will be back in Detroit > to stay in two weeks. > > WL. I am not adverse to seeking out individuals interested in revolutionary thought at all. They are not large in number these days, so there is plenty of time to do both that and reaching out to larger numbers at the level of Moore's. I was being a bit, well, semi-comic like Moore when I said throw over entirely to Moore-ism and that he is our Lenin (smile) Give me a call when you are here. > > > > ___ Marxism-Thaxis mailing list Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis
Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] Michael Moore: Capitalism has proven it's failed
>>> So, this layer of workers is asking a sophisticated question, a question about "the system", to the communists and socialists "if you guys are so smart what kind of system do you propose and how will it operate generally operate ?", but they do not have a clue as to what the word "communist "means ? That doesn't ring true. First of all , you have been talking to them for a while, so they already have heard of the term communist.<< Comment You miss the point. The point is “what is the solution.” I will try and write clearer. Other layers of the workers ask the same question. Take health care. “How will universal health care be paid for.” Another layer of the workers do not care how something is paid for and simply want access to socially necessary means of life. *** >>> When I work with your comrades fighting for water as a human right for low-income Detroiters or stopping the evictions of a bunch of people in an apartment building in Highland Park, with me representing the tenants, or Welfare Rights in general they deal with all kinds of literary petty bourgeois intellectuals. <<< Comment I speak for myself and myself only. I meet all kinds of people as a way of life. My “baby” - choice of work, is literature production with others. Here is an example. Both of us were involved in the last city election. The literature I passed out for that election was non-communist, because the candidate I was supporting is not a communist. However, after the election and during it I was involved in other activity where I could utilize a revolutionary press and Marxists literature. ** >>> Actually, if you look I didn't say mass _media_. I said just mass work. The monopoly media is very corrupt on these issues. That's part of why Moore's breakthrough in it , saying we need to replace capitalism with democracy, is so extraordinary. <<< Comment Without question Moore’s movie as mass media is extraordinary. Because we were speaking of a movie opening nationwide I took the conversation to be about mass media. I do not do work in the mass media. How one identify themselves and their terminology is personal with political connotations. If you choose to speak in terms of other countries that is fine. All of us are not the same and going to approach things different. My goal is to seek out those individuals interested in revolutionary thought. When I was a young man the writings of Engel’s changed my life. I have a feeling Engel’s will impact this generation of young people the same way. Will be back in Detroit to stay in two weeks. WL. ___ Marxism-Thaxis mailing list Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis
Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] Michael Moore: Capitalism has proven it's failed
On 9/29/09, waistli...@aol.com waistli...@aol.com> wrote: > > Communists and socialist are faced with a challenge; "If you guys are > so > > smart what kind of system do you propose and how will it generally > operate?" > > > CB: True, but maybe we should dispense with these names in our mass > work, and take up Michael Moore's terminology. > > Reply > > I do not do mass media work. Michael Moore does what he does, he makes > movies and I do not. Nor does any of my comrades. Our sphere of work is > amongst > a layer of the workers, who 99% are not anti-communist. In fact most have > not a clue as to what the word means. ^^^ So, this layer of workers is asking a sophisticated question, a question about "the system", to the communists and socialists "if you guys are so smart what kind of system do you propose and how will it operate generally operate ?", but they do not have a clue as to what the word "communist "means ? That doesn't ring true. First of all , you have been talking to them for a while, so they already have heard of the term communist. Then it is certain that you have already clued them into some of its meaning. Finally, they gotta be a bit , if not rabidly, anti-communist because they have lived in this country for all their lives, and they are asking you, a communist, a challenging question, as you put it. ^^^ The literary petty bourgeois > intellectual pretty much fall outside of my sphere of work - by choice. Well, preachers, lawyers, judges, journalists, accountants, politicians, city officials, students, professors and all sorts of other literary petty bourgeois intellectuals don't fall outside the sphere of work of your comrades in Detroit when they are trying fighting for poor people's rights to water, housing . When I work with your comrades fighting for water as a human right for low-income Detroiters or stopping the evictions of a bunch of people in an apartment building in Highland Park, with me representing the tenants, or Welfare Rights in general they deal with all kinds of literary petty bourgeois intellectuals. I see Maureen and Marian working with them all the time. They use more Michael Moore type terminology in their mass work. > > We have some ideas about mass work and "mass literature," which 99.9% does > not include the mass media, if I understand your use of this term. ^ Actually, if you look I didn't say mass _media_. I said just mass work. The monopoly media is very corrupt on these issues. That's part of why Moore's breakthrough in it , saying we need to replace capitalism with democracy, is so extraordinary ^ In your > mass media work - as an individual, it is totally to your discretion how > to identify yourself. I am not a spokesperson for any organization, although > I belong to several. As a communist, I advocate economic communism and > every energy is geared towards winning the individual to the cause of > communism and rearing the next generation of communist in America. Ok , but like the Bolivarians in Venezuela, the terminology used by the next generation might be more like Michael Moore's > > In the moment I have always fought for the objectives of the moment under > the banner victory to the workers in their current struggle. For instance, > most folks understood I was some kind of communists "something" in my trade > union work. When the issue was a strike I deal with the strike rather than > theories and ideology of communism. In my personal contact with individuals > I make an assessment of what kind of literature and propaganda is > appropriate to the moment. > > Actually, 99% of my work - for the past 40 years, deal with real struggles, > with only one assignment in the mass media. What creates a communist > ideological polarity, as a precondition to a political polarity, is an > organization dedicated to that. > > WL. I didn't say mass _media_, although Michael Moore's opens up a possibility of addressing even the mass media in terms such as "replace capitalism with democracy" ___ Marxism-Thaxis mailing list Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis
