aut-op-sy
mailing list archive
[ Other Periods
| Other mailing lists
| Search
]
Date:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Thread:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Index:
[ Author
| Date
| Thread
]
AUT: Re: unions against the war??
- Subject: AUT: Re: unions against the war??
- From: "Laura Fiocco" <fiocco@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 15:18:56 +0100
Neil wrote
> Nate, et al,
>
> The "stop the war" type slogans are more popular now
> because they may influence & draw a wider audience and forces into the
> protests. The problem here is that different social -class forces
> INSIDE the movement have differing-opposing concepts of what this means
> in terms of tactics and goals, theorizing and in practice..
> Our take on this is never to sneer at the masses basic humanist
sentiments
"masses" ? sic!
we are not masses, we are persons (singolarita') living, talking,
confronting with others persons, learning from experience and relations with
others. Any struggle means increasing the relationship with others, creating
a small or large collective group interacting with others and so creating
not only a social force but also a self-valorisation grouping that last
(memory and subjectivities) beyond the event. The process produces
collective subjects whose political power grows the more they become both
self valorising (quality and sense of life) and social forces
(cultural-political hegemony). To think we are masses means we are just
robot
that act under the software imposed by somebody (avanguardia)
> but to explain that this idea of preventing barbaric wars is not
> practicible
> under capitals hegemony over society.
>
> Those with illusions in the lib-labs, pacifism, pious religious
> preachments ,
> reformism, etc, should understand what the history of this means , those
> who rely on the
> 'powers that be' to turn 'swords into plowshares' will be rudely
> disappointed.
> That is what happened in the movement against Gulf War 1 in 1990-91.
> This disappointment at war and the blitzkreig victory for the US and
> allies,
> demoralized people and the US protests went flat , not 2 weeks after the
> war began.
the point is not if we subside to stop a war, either is if we (individually
and collectively) are able to grow up (upgrade the general intellect and the
way of living of the multitude). that is what happened in the 60's- 70's, at
least in my experience.
>
> INSIDE the movements today , the usual opportunist forces who claimed to
> support the
> demand "stop the war' now, right before 1/16/91 , were promoting the
> slogans 'support
> our troops"
maybe they have learn something meanwhile !!!! Why we shouldn't?
ciao laura
--- from list aut-op-sy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
- Thread context:
- Re: AUT: Re: unions against the war??, (continued)
- Re: AUT: Re: unions against the war??,
Laura Fiocco Tue 21 Jan 2003, 17:24 GMT
- Re: AUT: Re: unions against the war??,
Scott Hamilton Tue 21 Jan 2003, 22:05 GMT
- Re: AUT: Re: unions against the war??,
Nate Holdren Wed 22 Jan 2003, 05:21 GMT
- Re: AUT: Re: unions against the war??,
Harry M. Cleaver Wed 22 Jan 2003, 13:03 GMT
- AUT: Re: unions against the war??,
Laura Fiocco Wed 22 Jan 2003, 14:18 GMT
- Re: AUT: Re: unions against the war??,
Laura Fiocco Wed 22 Jan 2003, 14:26 GMT
- Re: AUT: Re: unions against the war??,
Harry M. Cleaver Wed 22 Jan 2003, 17:32 GMT
- AUT: Re: unions against the war??,
Harald Beyer-Arnesen Wed 22 Jan 2003, 20:20 GMT
- AUT: Re: unions against the war??,
Harald Beyer-Arnesen Thu 23 Jan 2003, 10:38 GMT
[ Other Periods
| Other mailing lists
| Search
]