Re: [Marxism] Camejo to speak at CCNY

[" Ian Pace" <ian@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

----- Original Message -----
From: <Octob1917@xxxxxxx>
To: <marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, September 25, 2004 8:01 PM
Subject: Re: [Marxism] Camejo to speak at CCNY


> In a message dated 9/25/2004 11:37:58 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
> mr.feldman@xxxxxxxxx writes:
> Marxist activism
> is about engaging working people starting from their current level of
> consciousness in such a way as to push them forward on the road towards
> organizing themselves as an independent political force."
>
>
> No, this is your own interpretation of Marxist activism. Again, it reveals
a
> condescension which I refute and reject towards 'working people.' Even the
way
> you use that term suggests that you consider yourself above them, as if
> working people are stupid and incapable of being trusted with the truth.
>
> The way to help people interpret the sense of alienation and hopelessness
is
> not by lying to them that if they were to vote for a certain candidate and
> pour all their energies into reform then they will see progress.
>
> Marxist activism is about pointing out the contradictions which are
inherent
> in a capitalist system and explaining why that system must be replaced and
> with what; not in preaching a message of reform and belief in that system
as a
> way forward. Socialists should only ever enter into bourgeois politics in
order
> to gain a platform from which to promote socialism and attack capitalism.
> Nothing in what Camejo or Nader are saying does that. They may be
attacking its
> excesses, but that's a world away from attacking it root and branch and
offering
> socialism as an alternative.
>
> Where does it come from, this idea that to openly talk socialism to people
> who are not yet socialists is a betrayal of socialism?
>
> We're not some weird cult which should hide our true beliefs behind a
veneer
> of neatly packaged, inoffensive policies. We are marxists (at least I hope
we
> are), socialists, with a collective vision for a better world than the one
we
> inhabit now. Just because the objective and material conditions are not
yet
> right for our message to reach as many as we would like is no reason to
abandon
> our principles or to dilute them.
>
Extremely true, and that's why the use of the term 'socialist' by liberals
and social democrats (who self-servedly call themselves the 'democratic
left') should be resisted adamantly. To believe that liberation is possible
within the existing system, give or take a bit of reform, is not to be a
socialist at all.

Ian



_______________________________________________
Marxism mailing list
Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism