AUT: Re: RE: antiwar movement

["FoofighterPilot" <cwright@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

This is really interesting...
> John:
>
> : zapatistas say is "We are quite
> : ordinary people, that is to say
> : rebels."
> [...]
> : opening up people's reactionary or
> : conservative positions and trying to
> : find the utopian kernel and working on
> : that.
>
> I can't see the connection between the two.  The
> first is a statement which overturns the usual
> situating of 'rebels' as transcendent; the second
> reasserts this transcendent role in the form of
> those who are able to ascertain the "utopian
> kernel" lurking behind the 'appearance' of
> conservatism.  I don't think hegelese is all that
> amenable to an anti-leninism, actually.
>
> Angela

What does anti-Leninism mean?  Certainly, as human beings under capital, we
are part and parcel of the formation of communist tendencies, of communist
critiques.  And yet, quite rightly, you pick up on a subtle problem in this
phrasing: it moves from the act of critique to the job of pedagogy.  IMO, we
critique without pedagogical intent, not to educate the masses, but as one
way that we fight capital.  We are not transcendant subjects from within
capital.  There is no individual 'higher space' or outside position.
Transcendance belongs to the class movement, to revolution, not to little
groups or individuals, IMO.

On the other hand, the zapatista quote smells of populism to me, esp. taken
out of context.  Actually, the Chiapas peasants are not ordinary at all.
Ordinary is a sloppy universal, a generalization with no substance in
itself.  They are very specific people, in very specific conditions.  It is
not as ordinary people that they have a purchase on our attention, but in so
far as they too confront (regardless of the specific terms used) capital,
that they propose solutions in practice.  I know that the EZLN has tried to
drop the old language, but the resultis a return to an even older language.
Instead of being transcendant as revolutionaries, they often seem to give up
on transcending capital, which is not the task nor a possibility for
revolutionaries.

Anway, thank you.  Good spot and I largely agree with your comments to Dave.

Cheers,
Chris



     --- from list aut-op-sy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---