======================================================================
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
======================================================================
Morning Mark,
I'm not saying that the Greens are guilty of the petrification of Marxian
language. I was talking about the Socialists/Communists parties in America.
This is no longer the 19th Century, and so we should not use canned vocabulary
to explain the essence behind the appearance to the people. Capitalism has
changed and dialectical concepts should reflect that change.
My point about the Greens is that, yes, they set people in motion around key
issues, but spontaneous protest must be translated into organized action that
calls for a radical restructuring of society, and that's the role of the
leadership. There's a gap or leap between the consciousness of the people, even
the people in revolt, and true class consciousness. The Greens (like American
Anarchists) place too much emphasis on the process of struggle, and not enough
emphasis on intellectual comprehension of the process that sums it up, and
plainly explains to the people that Capitalism has to go. Marxists have an
obligation to tell the people what they know in a language the people can
relate to.
Question: I don't know who started this thread, but do you care about the
elections on tuesday?
g
>
> ======================================================================
> Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
> ======================================================================
>
>
> Frankly, Glenn, I don't see the difference between your insistence on
> "Marxist analysis in a language that people can understand," which you say
> > ________________________________________________
________________________________________________
Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu
Set your options at:
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
