Re: AUT: A Reply to Noam Chomsky

["FoofighterPilot" <cwright@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>
>  Chris says;
> The emphasis on abstensionism misses a few things.
>
> First, for most people who do not vote, it is not for the same reasons
that
> we do not vote.  Nor will we convince many people to not vote.  Our power
is
> not in our pedagogical or mass consciousness altering ability.  That is
> little different from Social Democracy and Leninism.
>
> Neil thinks and questions;
>
> You are not a Leninist or Social Democrat because in
> your political work , you are emphatic about defending
> class struggle political positions (e.g. anti-parliamentarianism).
> And what do you do when the non-communist worker asks you
>  about the bourgeois elections?
> Won't you tell him/her your analysis, no holds barred?

This is funny.  Do you oppose their fighting for a wage increase either even
though communism means the abolition of the wages system?  It is one thing
to put forward a call for such minimalist demands, it is another to oppose
them.  But then you believe that there would be no difference between Bush
and Kerry.  IMO, anyone who thinks Kerry and Bush are the same is
delusional.  That does not mean I am voting, since I don't tailor my
politics to the bourgeois event of the moment.  Better to show the real
problems with both parties, with the state and with capital.  It may seem
abstract, but no trap is nastier than the trap of defining one's politic on
their terrain.

> Chris;
> Second, voting is not the worst thing that people do.  Being involved in
> active electioneering is a whole different ballgame.  Supporting Nader and
> or asking him to lead an abstention campaign we are too tiny to lead is
> worse than voting, as it sows more illusions.  Voting does not stop anyone
> from going on strike or doing most other activities.
>
> Neil;
>
> Wrong. Nader wants you to vote. A Protest vote for him
> and then the 'party line' vote for all congressional Democrats
> Further, there  in fact have been very distinct times
> here over the years
> when election pomp and voting were used to 'cool out the struggles'
> and as a  political placebo for not doing work to build mass actions,
> demos, rallies, mass  meetings, etc.

Actually, I was addressing Dave and New Dem.  I personally think that a vote
for Nader is much like any other vote, a sign of relative powerlessness, but
it would indicate something more interesting to see something like an
independent candidate who appealed to people.  Not because it would be good
in itself, but because a more active, public political life would be better
than this.

> Chris;
> Third, in a period like this, it is unclear what abstaining means to most
> people.  More likely depression and disgust than active refusal or
> resistance, judging by the abscence of other actions.
>
> Neil; OK, it means many things to  these 'multitudes'
> of differing  abstentionists, but probably more  now the
> objective phenomena changing which will play more a role , but ones
> that are in motion and chagable into  a number of more open
> political directions.
> So, even if communists are marginal, it makes little sense
> to stand around just  playing pocket pool. You can talk to
> a few of these abstainer forces politically,really. Certainly
> other political trends won't miss the opportunity !

What's up with the 'multitudes' thing?  And what is wrong with pocket pool?
Are you also against touching yourself?  Another Leftist prude?  And I,
since I have no organizational delusions, speak to people, not forces (real
or imagined.)  And we should all talk to people, but is it my job to
convince 'the masses' one person at a time?  Underneath this is a very
pedagogical politics with little or no distance from Social
Democracy/Leninism.

> Chris,
>
> Fourth, why do Leftists have this overbearing need to tell people what to
> do?  I know it is more work to show how, even if they are different, Bush
> and Kerry  are each in their own way working to defend capital, but it is
> more interesting.
>
> Neil again;
> HHHhmmmm. Many 'leftists'  in the USA are actually telling people
> 'all out' to support Kerry and the other Democrats. At the 3/20 antiwar
> March /Demo in LA , these forces were selling Red tee-shirts with
>  big Nazi swastika insignias  on them and inscribed "Vote Republican"!
> Give it to these liberal DP/lefts, they understand emotions and psychology
> (petty bourgeois) but you underestimate they also still have plenty of
influence
> in the social consciousness.

I underestimate nothing.  The Leftists who are pro-Kerry or
lesser-of-two-evils-so-go-vote or who are focussed on Evil Bush have
currency because they tap into the way that popular revulsion finds
currency.  They do not promote as much as they tail and give a certain Left
form to this.  For my part, I encourage less finger-waving and bossing and
more real discussion.  But your conception is that the goal of revolutionary
activity is consciousness-raising.  That is not my activity nor one that is
particularly pro-revolutionary.

Cheers,
Chris



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