====================================================================== 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