Socialist Constitutional Amendment

[Lisa Rogers <EQDOMAIN.EQWQ.LROGERS@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hey, we're talking about something practical/activist!

Some of the public discourse lately has been in terms of making
several essential aspects of life into legally recognized human
rights - well, we know how far we got on health care.  (Believe me
Jerry, I am too cynical to rely on the gov'mint.)

It still seems to me that this kind of phrasing can be useful and
persuasive.  It was to me, before I was even a [self-named,
marx-reading] socialist.

I am interested in envisioning and enacting a feasible socialism in
the US.  I've mentioned things around this topic on the list before,
and got shot down twice, as in "we'll have time to worry about that
after the revolution."

Well, I hope that legal arguments and such are part of the mechanism
of revolution itself.

Otherwise, what?  Nobody here is stockpiling weapons for a civil war,
I expect.  So, what are the steps toward socialism, starting from
where we are now?

I admit an extra interest this week, because Ehrbar has assigned my
class a final essay: describing a socialist utopia.  I am still
interested in the between steps, too.

Thanks for any thoughts on the topic,
Lisa
UofU

>>> <glevy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>  6/2/95, 08:49pm >>>
"People before profit" might make a catchy slogan. A similar slogan
is  (on a more specific issue): "Housing is a human right."

It would be unwise, though, to rely on the bourgeois legal system for
the  fulfillment of these demands or on the court system for
sympathy.  They  could, however, be used as educational and
organizing slogans.

Jerry

On Fri, 2 Jun 1995, Justin Schwartz wrote:

>  > Probbaly we do agree, more or less, at least that capitalists
have no
> moral right to pursue profit at others' expense. But they certainly
do
> have the legal right to do this, and the Constitution was not
written, and
> has not been construed (nor could it be) to suggest anything
otherwise. We
> might appeal to some of the deep moral principles embodied in the
> Constitution (general welfare and all that) against capitalist
rights, but
> abolishing those rights,. from a strictly legal point of view,
would take
> a Constitutional amendment.  >  > A question for all and sundry:
How might this be phrased?
>  > --Justin Schwartz
>  >  >  >  >      --- from list marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
---
>




     --- from list marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---

     ------------------