Observations on the Socialist Scholars Conference

[Louis Proyect]

For the entire time I was a member of the SWP and active in the Central 
America solidarity movement from the late 1960s until 1990, I never 
attended a SSC although I was certainly aware that they were taking 
place. I went to one in the early 1990s just out of curiosity, but found 
little of relevance to me. At the time I had no idea who Althusser was, 
nor did I have any interest in Marxist interpretation of Madonna videos.

After I discovered the Internet and began learning about academic 
Marxism, I made a point of dropping in on these yearly events. For the 
past couple of years, I have limited myself to the Saturday sessions. 
This year highlighted some of the basic weaknesses of this event.

To begin with, there was absolutely nothing about Venezuela or 
Haiti--two of the more important hot spots in the world today. I have no 
idea how panels get scheduled, but I assume that people--mostly 
professors--have no problem getting something scheduled. But if you are 
not part of the old boy's network (DSA, Brecht Forum, Socialist 
Register, URPE, MR), it is unlikely that you would come forward. If I 
were on the program committee, I would make a point of researching the 
activist community in the Haitian community, etc. and recruiting experts.

Discussions of imperialism and the world economy are becoming more and 
more a centerpiece of such gatherings. But unlike discussions I have 
heard in the past when I was involved with Trotskyist politics, they are 
rather detached from politics. You get what is in effect "diagnoses" 
about a patient (capitalism) from Marxist physicians. Is the patient 
healthy? Is GDP rising? Is China financing the expansion of the US 
economy? Is Europe becoming a rival imperialist power? How does its PSA 
tests look?

There is a travelling circus that goes from conference to conference 
reporting on these questions: Peter Gowan, Leo Panitch, Immanuel 
Wallerstein, Gérard Duménil, Bill Tabb, et al. It is a discussion of 
imperialism, but within the framework of IR, poli sci or economics. By 
contrast, when Lenin wrote about imperialism, it was in the context of 
launching the Zimmerwald conferences. Entirely missing from these 
discussions is the all important question of what is to be done.

When it comes to activism, the SSC gives heavy representation to open 
enemies of classical Marxism. This generally involves panels devoted to 
the World Social Forum and other aspects of the anti-globalization 
movement. In a panel I attended yesterday with Naomi Klein and other 
such figures, it was a breath of fresh air to hear Jean-Pierre Page, a 
trade union leader and CP member who advised the other panelists that if 
"another world is possible", it will only come into existence through 
socialist revolution. During the discussion period, I asked Klein if she 
is not a socialist, then what is she? Is the idea to fight for 
autonomous factory occupations, squats and soup kitchens in perpetuity? 
To me that is like having intercourse without coming to a climax.

The primary sponsor of the event is the Democratic Socialists of 
America, who basically function as the leftwing of the Democratic Party. 
Plenaries are designed to promote that point of view, which of course is 
their privilege. I doubt that such a conference would ever get off the 
ground without the participation of DSA professors like Stanley 
Aronowitz and Bogdan Denitch using their university connections to line 
up spaces. At one point one of the prime movers in the conference was 
somebody high up in the CUNY system, whose name I cannot recall.

Unfortunately revolutionary socialism has no such equivalent venue. In 
the early 1990s, the Guardian newspaper and MR sponsored an event but it 
was never repeated. The Guardian newspaper would soon fold and MR 
appeared to lack interest in building up circles of supporters, even 
though in my opinion such a thing was possible.

Fortunately revolutionary socialists do have a way of exchanging ideas 
without relying on the good graces of academia. Marxmail and other such 
mailing lists not only connect people all around the world, they do so 
on a level playing field. Although Naomi Klein did not deign to answer 
my rude question, she has to be aware that critics of autonomism on the 
Internet do not have to wait to be called on and to limit themselves to 
a question or to three minutes.

--

The Marxism list: www.marxmail.org