Re: [Marxism] Antiwar "leaders" can't break reformist habits

[Carrol Cox <cbcox@xxxxxxxxx>]

"Steven L. Robinson" wrote:
>
> Not so much "fat and lazy" but, rather, obedient  to those donors who pay for 
> the sinecures. He who pays the piper calls the tune.

I don't think it necessary to speculate on their motives. The liberal
mindset runs very very deep, and one does not need to assume either
laziness or obedience. For years Two or three of us on LBO have been
trying to get across the point that mass movements do not need a
majority, that they don't even need a very large minority, to make a
tremendous impact. But even among those who consider themselves
revolutionaries there are those who just can't see past temporary
majorities, and from that inability slip into the tactic of lobbying,
which is what the UFPJ leaders quoted in Counterpunch are talking about.

I spent a whole day once arguing with a CISPES traveler that we should
give more emphasis on reaching those who really agreed with us but
didn't know we existed rather than on lobyying congress. It is a
terribly hard point to get across.

I forget which one now, but one of Nixon's aides reports in his Memoirs
that in the fall of 1969 they were on the verge of using nuclear bombs
on the Chinese installations in North Vietnam. They were dissuaded by
the size and the militancy of the November Moratorium.

That wasn't built by anxiety over poll numbers or hopes of somehow
persuading jerks in Congress to be less jerky.

Carrol


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