Re: [Marxism] Michael Moore decline continues

["Carlos A. Rivera" <cerejota@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Carrol Cox" <cbcox@xxxxxxxxx>

> There are quite a few individual leftists in the u.s., many more than at
> present we can gather into a collection of interrelating groups to make
> a coalition that could properly be referred to as "The Left."

I disagree profoundly. There is a "left" in the USA. As hetereogenous and
problematic as anywhere else.

But this is a matter of semantics. Michael Moore constantly, including in
the article I re-published, identifies what HE calls the left in a concrete
fashion:

You might diasgree with Michael Moore's arguement, but attacking his use of
the term "the left" is a weak shot.

>  But "The
> Left" doesn't exist, and the reason for their apparent ineffectiveness
> is not their own errors but the strength of capital in the u.s.

This is exactlly the kind of "blame the others" mentality I concur with MM
that is making the Right win.

When the right saw that their agenda was getting eroded they blamed no one
but themselves, and did something about it.

The left needs a Karl Rove, not self-defeating commentary. Which is one big
point I totally agree with in MMs body of polemics. The problem is one of a
lack of winning strategy, and a big obstacle to reach that winning strategy
is our inability to reach the only people capable of effecting true change:
the working class.

The right, from the "moderate" Democrats to the fascist grouplets, on the
other hand, has been quite successful in reaching the working class, even if
to objectively attack their interests.

Lenin said of parlamentary participation that it should be like giving the
rope to the bourgeoise so they can hang themselves with it. The Right in the
USA has fully understood that, and is giving us the rope every day.

Unfortunately, we seem all to happy to oblige. Michael Moore sees that, and
we don't want to hear it. It is more comfortable to send money to Pacifica,
or to our favorite group, than to actually engage in a two-sided
conversation with the working class.

>  That needs thought -- not empty criticism of "The Left."

I disagree that MM's criticism is empty, (and ironically he engaes in the
same thought process you seem to advocate.)

You might disagree with it (I do with many of his stuff, but not the
particular article), but it is far from empty. I'll grant you, it is not
academic, and it is not hard marxism. But neither was Joseph Dietzgen, and
he invented dialectical materialism, if we are to believe Engels (and
Dietzgen was an anarchist, not a marxist, BTW).

Unfortunately, all the replies I have seen here to Michael Moore's "Is the
left nuts?" article only serve to illustrate his point. We are arrogant,
self-defeating, and completely closed to any type of criticism that makes
have to come to the conclusion that we might indeed be wrong, and that we
indeed have to change.

sks


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