[Marxism] RE: The Real Shocker of the US Elections

["Calvin Broadbent" <calvinbroadbent@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Well said Marv.

cheers.


MARV GANDALL WROTE:

Doesn't most everyone claim to act on the basis of their "moral values",
supplying their own content and generally ignoring or denying the abuses
commited in their name? In the US, these people would say they are defending
traditional white American Christian (Protestant) values of self-reliance,
respect for God and country, the patriarchal family, abstinence, charitable
giving and community service etc. against the licentiousness and corruption
of liberal intellectuals and other big city folks who hold these values in
contempt. Foreigners and others, especially non-whites, who don't subscribe
to their values are effectively denied their humanity, particularly when
these values are seen to be under threat. So you could talk to them until
you are blue in the face about civilian casualties in Iraq, and they will
simply deny this is happening, dismiss it as enemy propaganda, or, at best,
casually acknowledge that there will always be "some" innocent victims of a
just war.

A Zionist would also claim to be acting on the basis of their higher "moral
values". So would an Islamic fundamentalist. Even Marxists distinguish
between "their morals and ours", and many well-intentioned supporters of
Stalin ignored or denied crimes committed in its name.

An insular attachment to a particular set of values is eroded when people
come into contact with others who don't subscribe to their particular dogma
or look the same as them, but who are discovered to have similar interests
and respond in a similar way to immediate problems which require collective
action. The unionized workplace is where this most often happens. Attachment
to a particular set of values also breaks down where these are no longer
seen as affording protection. If there is a sudden deterioration in physical
or economic security, which the traditional religious or political
authorities are unable to prevent, people will as a necessary matter of
survival often cast around for new values and the leaders and institutions
which embody them. That's why wars and economic crises produce radical
shifts in people's consciousness.

Conciousness is not static, and evolves in response to changing conditions.
But I think a deep change in social conditions is a prerequisite, and is a
fact often lost on the contemporary left, which can lead to impatience,
contempt for the "stupid" masses, and sectarian political behaviour. It's
reasonable to suppose if white working-class American conservatives,
including those in the suburban communities of the South, start losing their
jobs and homes in large numbers, they will lose confidence at the same time
in the values, leaders, and institutions whom they presently credit for
their still tolerable standards and status. Whether they move to the right
or to the left in a crisis, to parties which promise to improve their
conditions by a more stringent application of traditional values or to
parties which offer a different set of alternatives, will depend on a whole
complex of factors, not least of which is where they live and work, who they
come into contact with, and which of the choices on offer looks most likely
to succeed in resolving the crisis.

But I expect you know this already, Jurriann, and your comments above were
intended as irony.

MG

_________________________________________________________________
It's fast, it's easy and it's free. Get MSN Messenger today!
http://www.msn.co.uk/messenger


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