====================================================================== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. ======================================================================
On 4/25/2010 10:09 AM, Carrol Cox wrote: > ====================================================================== > Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. > ====================================================================== > > > There are two really quite different quetions here being discussed as > though they were one. > > Question 1: Would a left organized by a single hegemonic party be > better/ > > Question 2: Will there ever be a single hegemonic party? That is, does > Question 1 make any sense. > > Question 1 doesNOT make any sense. There simply will not be such a > Party, no matter how many leftists think there should be. If you go to the top of this thread, to the initial question, you'll notice no mention of a "single hegemonic" party; It wasn't part of the question, mate. The question is much simpler: "What is the role of a political party of socialism in the U.S., here and now?" > > It is a uttyer waste of time and intellect to argue over whether a > Single Party is desirable. One might as well argue over whether a candy > mountain in one's backyard is desirable. It is a non-question. At this point I will agree with you: It's a waste of time to discuss one or many parties if we have not yet arrived at an answer to the initial question. Point being that unless we define with greater exactitude what role a party must play in the lives and struggles of workers we will be going in circles, as in this discussion. > > Multiple centers is like climate and terrain. It is there! Our problem > is not whether it is desirable or not but how to develop our practice > to fit this social fact. In stead of endlessly moaning the absence of > what will never be leftists need to focus on the reality of multiple > organizations (most of them not parties) and work out ways of dealing > with that reality. I suppose there are realities that must accepted as unchangeable. whereas there are some that either need not exist and yet others that can or must be changed. I'm not convinced that this multiplicity of organizations, as you say, is desirable in the long run or immutable. Nor do I think it is an insurmountable obstacle to uniting the working class for the purpose of our emancipation. But as I stated above, that does not figure in the original question. In time, I suppose, it will. ________________________________________________ Send list submissions to: [email protected] Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
