Re: Marxism, language and laughter

[Carrol Cox <cbcox@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Some distinctions and discriminations are needed here. Marxist
organizing and agitation involves not just "reaching" people
passively. (Journalists and teachers have a passive audience.)
We don't want to win them just for the 60 seconds in which
they cast a ballot, nor are we primarily interested in merely
evoking a "that's right" response. We wish to involve them
actively in prolonged (often dangerous) struggle. And this is
what (I believe) the rhetoric (admirable in the abstract) of
Hightower, Ivins, Moore will not do. I like to read Ivins --
but the practical effect of her columns is apt to be a
contribution to the lesser-evil choice of Democratic
candidates. Marxist agitation (I am assuming the traditional
agitation -- propaganda -- theory classification) needs
usually to be tied to (develop from) ongoing struggles.
Mao took that for granted. In the U.S. and I suspect
all first world and many third-world nations that cannot
be taken for granted.

Carrol

Chris Kromm wrote:

> Say what you will about populists (Hightower, Ivins, etc.) but they usually
> have the best sense of humor, esp. if they're from Texas. In fact, I've
> found that Southerners in general have an edge up in this respect.
> CK
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Nestor Miguel Gorojovsky <gorojovsky@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> > Julio is right. Wit and a clever dagger are more useful than a dozen
> > bombers. If I were American, I would try to begin with Mark Twain.