>John W writes:
>So what revolutionary women were there in this vote !!!!
Anyone got any figures on Ali's popularity among women vs men? I know where
my Mum stands, but I hardly think she's typical of most women.
>Part of this discussion I suspect has more to do with certain male
>comrades who actually like Ali mainly because of his performance in
>the ring. The truth is that they disguise there enjoyment of the
>macho 'sport' of boxing under the cloak of revolutionary
>respectability (perhaps they are the 'middle aged' men who 'remember
>the glory days of their youth' which Hugh argues are the majority of
>the voters). His great revolutionary victory might not have been so
>warmly welcomed if this list contained a few more (or more vocal)
>women and young people. As Bob says you are defending 'something that
>the kids don't even remember'. (Though I'm sure you enjoyed the 60s
>yourself.)
This is the heart of John's thesis -- as if this BBC junket were more than
just a fake superstructural event. What's interesting is the distorted
reflection it gives of mass p-b "public opinion", which is *not* erstwhile
radical left youth but once young middle-of-the-roaders -- the youth
revolution that welcomed the pill and sex and rhythm in popular culture
(including Elvis, whatever else he stood for) and disapproved of the war in
Vietnam, that didn't go manning the trains and buses during the strikes of
68 but either supported them or kept passive.
As for enjoying the sixties John seems to forget that there was a generally
rotten culture of puritanical rich-folks and country club morals (flog the
slaves for fornicating but get yer rocks off in Havanna yourself). The film
White Christmas just about sums up what it had to offer the youth of the
time. The good bits were all in revolt against this crust of crap -- it was
like playing water polo in a cesspool. The adult world just didn't exist as
far as models or emotional or intellectual contact or anything worth having
was concerned. We didn't enjoy getting trampled by horses at Grosvenor
Square or being put into Brixton for it, and the kids at Kent State didn't
enjoy getting shot at, and it wasn't much fun getting slammed by the cops
in Chicago either. Or gassed by the CRS in Paris, or thrown in jail in
Prague. What was stimulating was that there were so many young people ready
to do something about it, but what rotten leadership there was!
>Oddly he concludes this political discourse with the claim that:
>> This is also recognition for the black power sprinters with their raised
>> black fists in Mexico 1968.
>
>How is it? Except for you?
Same mass democratic protest movement that Ali's conversion and anti-war
stance ("Ain't no Vietnamese ever called me a nigger!") represent. Remember
the killings carried out by state repression at the Olympics!
>
>> So as I see it, even the posh halls of the bourgeoisie have to let a breath
>> of air in from the hurricane blowing outside. Of course they try to contain
>> it, but just look at what they're trying to contain!
>
>What else did Ali do that was so great? He was just influenced by the
>situation he was in, he hardly led it. Also just being a Muslim is
>not necessarily a revolutionary act, in fact one could make a similar
>argument to that I made against boxing (though I am not sure I would
>go that far).
Andy Lehrer answers this well:
>He refused to obey his draft notice sending him to Vietnam.
>
>I'm not a boxing fan (frankly, I think the sport should be banned) but I
>admire
>Ali for his stand on Vietnam and for his vocal stand on civil rights, a stand
>many other black athletes refused to take.
>> it certainly wasn't by being a black Elvis and trotting
>> off to serve his imperialist masters.
>
>Does it therefore follow that if Elvis is to win the 'music
>personality of the century' then this would be a great victory for
>the forces of reaction and further bolster the power of the
>bourgeoisie????
It would be a far less clear-cut victory for the democratic youth movement.
Elvis (while he was still unmummified) was completely schizophrenic in
relation to received social values as against what he really liked. He
liked black music, rock and roll, overtly sensual body movement -- what
more do you want! And he wasn't afraid of feelings -- at least as far as
the surface acting out of them went. But he also liked Nixon and supported
the state. Note too the attempt to fetishize Elvis as the mummified version
and canonize the Las Vegas glitz and bombast. Might as well canonize
Liberace.
>The point I am making is that he is actually remembered for his
>boxing. If it wasn't for the fact that he was a boxer - and that
>boxing is actively and widely promoted by a section of the
>bourgeoisie - then any political act he was involved in would have
>gone unnoticed.
So what sport should have been chosen in the best of all possible worlds?
Shin-hacking? Crown-and-anchor? Poker? Strip poker? Darts? Bowling? Downing
a yard of ale?
The sporting phenomenon of the century that meant most was probably the
mass grass-roots self-organized sporting movement in the working class of
the kind that developed in Sweden and Finland. But that's not what the BBC
bash was all about, was it? First we take power, then we start discussing
sports and the rest of it in ways that count.
Cheers,
Hugh
--- from list [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---
