>>> "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 08/16 4:19
AM >>>
Tahir,
The ideals you list below are sweet, and I feel confident
that every socialist identifies with them.
Good I'm glad, although I see that you snipped the earlier
quote which was more the one that was relevant to your
stated positions.
You choose to call them Communism (though they differ
markedly from the realities of those who practiced political
economy under that name).
Whom I have vigorously criticised on this list a number of
times, notably our departed friend, Stan, aka "bon moun" or
something. But naturally I don't suppose you read all of my
posts. But if you had read them you would have seen my
critiques of Bolshevism in all its forms, including
Leninism, Stalinism, Trotskyism, etc. The communism in the
Camatte quote (you don't seem to have noticed that it was a
quote) reflects his own critique and also assimilation of
Marx.
What I want to know is: how do you plan to get there?
Thoreau said that it's a fine thing to build our castles in
the sky, but our foundations must be built right here on the
ground. Very well, what do you propose? How are we going to
realize these fine ambitions?
I'm grappling with this like many others on the list, some
who are mightily pessimistic. I am pessimistic in the short
term, as I said a while ago. I don't believe that the
establishment of small idealistic communities is any
solution, for reasons given in the Camatte quote that you
snipped. I think that the complete abolition of capital is
the only solution. You might have seen my extended polemic
on this with a certain list member recently.
IMO, Cooperation offers us a way to realize much of it, and
does not require any wholesale political change to effect
it. Cooperation has shown itself to be adaptable to a
number of political conditions (though there have been a few
that have done it in from time to time . . .) It would only
require a kind of moral commitment on the part of a
significant number of participants. There is absolutely no
reason why it could not command, by degrees, economic power
and then, as a reflex, political power, just as the guilds
in medieval Europe, without ever firing a shot at the landed
gentry or the mercantile associations -- real economic and
political hegememony which lasted till the industrial
revolution. It has been done before, it is in the process
of being done again. Even as we speak more cooperatives
slowly spring up and revolutionize our way of doing
business. If the movement became truly popular, it might
just be the ticket home for all of us.
Well I don't think so, and, judging from the responses,
neither do many of the list members. But even if they do, it
won't make much difference to me. Call me plain narrow
minded. But I associate myself with left communism as a
broad movement, and I sure don't see any sign that you have
grappled with that. (I would point you to some websites if I
thought you were interested.) In fact your comments only
show a superficial grasp of the old style communism.
There is a swelling anti-capitalist movement internationally
- watch the press - that has more potential in my view. But
I think political organisation needs eventually to come onto
that particular agenda.
Tahir
_______________________________________________
Crashlist resources: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/crashlist
