Forum Post: The Question of Ideology
Posted 13 years ago on Oct. 7, 2011, 10:43 p.m. EST by FHampton
(309)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
From Doug Henwood, who has been very good in offering political economic analysis:
I know this will prompt more rebukes for trying to impose an anachronistic old left on the spontaneously new, but someone’s got to do it.
I read this quote in the New York Times the other day. I know that that may not be the go-to medium for reports on Occupy Wall Street, but it’s not unrepresentative of some of the things I’ve seen and heard first hand from that quarter:
“This is not about left versus right,” said the photographer, Christopher Walsh, 25, from Bushwick, Brooklyn. “It’s about hierarchy versus autonomy.”
Autonomy in this context sounds like a hipster version of bourgeois individualism. I’ve also seen a bit of Ron Paul-ish “end the Fed” stuff around OWS, which is a topic in itself, something I’ll take up in the near future. But I don’t want to get that wonky just now. I just want to make a simple point. Occupy Wall Street is hardly about autonomy. It’s about living out solidarity and about attracting people to a movement. They’re living a collectivity, even if they’re not articulating it that way.
I suspect the problem is that three decades of neoliberalism have destroyed any available vocabulary for solidarity. My guess is that most of the people in Zuccotti Park were born after Thatcher and Reagan took office. There’s no such thing as society, as the Lady said. But there is, and we need more of it.
Dough Henwood is the shiznit.
I understand why people want to eschew labels at this point, but I think we need to take an emphatically leftist stance like the people on the street. The conspiracy/ron paul/teaparty people will kill this movement in a hurry. Their randian philosophy is poison and anyone with half a brain can see it.
I agree with you. I also think Hudson's point about the insidiousness of the Democratic Party 2012 reelection strategy needs to be understood.
It certainly does need to be understood. There are too many well meaning people falling victim to the populist facade that Obama puts forth. Was he the lesser of two evils in 2008? who knows, but we need to get some true progressive/populists in office to make legitimate change.
I don't know but I think he is JUST LIKE Mitt Romney except for some possible access to conservative Christians that Romney might provide.
Really, I thought until today that the one remaining Obama advantage was a bit more social liberalism, but now that the DOJ announced they plan to raid legal dispensaries in CA after OilBomber promised he wouldn't do that, I am just absolutely done with him.
I'm voting for a third party.
I'm voting third party as well, but we can't expect that to mean anything until we have a functioning democracy.
This Movie should be watched by as many people as possible I am working on making this link go viral I would like you to watch it and if you agree Pass it to everyone you Know or meet and ask them to do the same http://ethosthemovie.com/
Yes, but electoral politics cannot be the horizon or even focus. There are institutional barriers which make elections a huge drag on energy, with very little gained in return.
I myself am partial to the idea of organizing for a general strike, the effects of which, granted, would be somewhat difficult to predict.
I wholeheartedly agree that we need to revamp the system before we can rely on electoral politics as such. I need to look into what the effects of a general strike would be before I can fully advocate one. From what I can see they would surely hurt the 99% temporarily, but the real question is what is the net effect. If they can create change for the greater good, then I would offer my support. It seems that if we could shut the country down that we would definitely have some leverage.
Yes--we might look to the November 30th general strike that has been called in the UK to understand more about the strategy and hoped-for impact.
A call for a general strike went out today in Chile, as part of the struggle over the privatization of that country's education system.
Of course, Greece has also staged a general strike this week.
These strikes should all be studied.
I will certainly keep my eyes peeled. I've been following Chile for some time now.
Here are some speculations on the feasibility and effects of a general strike:
http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/10/2011107135115719238.html
I hope we can get to a point where enough people will listen to a call for a general strike. I'm not sure we're there yet. I think that if Bloomberg tries to shut this down, that might garner enough public outrage to pull of a general strike.
That is a good point. In the past few months it seems unions have been more willing to use the strike (I'm thinking in particular of the longshoremen on the west coast, the nurses union, teachers in Washington State, hotel workers in Los Angeles, and of course the Verizon workers on the east coast). If any strikes are planned for the near future, it should be a priority for them to generalize their grievances, connecting them up with those of the OWS people. That too could be a way to prepare people psychologically for a mass action.
Yes the unions would be dumb not to join with a movement growing this rapidly. Sadly there seems to be an anti union element at least on this forum. That is what scares me.
Hear hear! You said it! The concept of individualism is pure poison to anyone with only half a brain!
Another rand cultist who has probably never even read her half-assed works.
You know you've lost an argument as soon as you begin namecalling. It's the signal that you have no more logic, reason, or ideas to bring to the table.
I have plenty to bring to the table. You've brought nothing.
Ok, you win.
Thank you sir.
This Movie should be watched by as many people as possible I am working on making this link go viral I would like you to watch it and if you agree Pass it to everyone you Know or meet and ask them to do the same http://ethosthemovie.com/
its about: If ethical actions and up right honest dealings, is bad for cooperate profit, then something must change. Life and living requires ethical uprightness. Ethical uprightness has the right to occupy cooperate America. Politicians and cooperate executives have the right to be ethical and do honest dealings. And they do not exercise that right, of which they have been given, or are entrusted with, the power to do.
People should attend this debate:
http://jacobinmag.com/blog/?p=1764
It is amazing how quick some politicians are talking against the movement. Some news media are also manipulating how iit s presented to outsiders.
What I find interesting is that the movement is not party affiliated and it comes to life from people sharing the pain of wrongdoing actions from a few elite protected minority.
Let's keep it well and alive, cause change is coming.
well said Its not amazing, who do you think owns the media, and manipulates Politicians.
This Movie should be watched by as many people as possible I am working on making this link go viral I would like you to watch it and if you agree Pass it to everyone you Know or meet and ask them to do the same http://ethosthemovie.com/
I'm not sure I understand your comment. Are you talking about Henwood? Henwood is a radical left economist and analyst who is critiquing some aspects of the movement with the hope of improving it. Clearly what he is writing here is in the spirit of solidarity.
No doubt. I was just pointing out to intentional efforts to present the movement as something it is not. It is not about an idealism, ideology, a candidate or a party. It is people sharing the same concern about recent government and corporate excesses and greed, resulting in millions without jobs, a weak economy, and so on.
Let's try to keep it that way...people wanting to be heard...wanting those few to realize their actions are being noted, and that they won't be able to continue like that forever or without being accountable.
Thanks for your response. I understand what you are saying, but I must say that we should not be shy about committing to certain good ideas.
From Michael Hudson's piece, "Obama's New Populist Fakery" at CounterPunch.org:
"The problem facing Obama is obvious enough: How can he hold the support of moderates and independents (or as Fox News calls them, socialists and anti-capitalists), students and labor, minorities and others who campaigned so heavily for him in 2008? He has double-crossed them – smoothly, with a gentle smile and patronizing pattern talk, but with an iron determination to hand federal monetary and tax policy over to his largest campaign contributors: Wall Street and assorted special interests. The Democratic Party’s Rubinomics and Clintonomics core operators, plus smooth Bush Administration holdovers such as Tim Geithner, not to mention quasi-Cheney factotums in the Justice Department."
[...]
"President Obama’s solution has been to do what any political demagogue does: Come out with loud populist campaign speeches that have no chance of becoming the law of the land, while more quietly giving his campaign contributors what they’ve paid him for: giveaways to Wall Street, tax cuts for the wealthy (euphemized as tax “exemptions” and mark-to-model accounting, plus an agreement to count “income” as “capital gains” taxed at a much lower rate)."
http://www.counterpunch.org/2011/10/07/obama%e2%80%99s-new-populist-fakery/
Real talk.
FHampton
I can understand your point, but this goes back to Reganomics “trickle down” as the rich get richer the peasantry gets the morsels. You still hear the reasoning of, don’t tax the job creators “corporations”, but they are not creating jobs here. And most don’t pay, or pay much in first place. Before Reganomics when jobs were plenty, availability of heath care was not an issue. Now corporations are in charge of your heath (for example).
Nobody would listen when these agreements with other nations to have an open economy were be developed, or even cared then, and now we see the result.
Not sure I understand the "but" in your comment--are you disagreeing with Michael Hudson's point? Because it sure seems like you are in agreement with him.
Another excellent blog from a left perspective:
http://jdeanicite.typepad.com/
It is an interesting blog entry but I really like the Fuck Off poster. I wonder where it comes from?
I don't know, unfortunately.
The Democratic Party establishment seems to be gearing up to at least make a first attempt at integrating OWS into its reelection campaign.
I really do think this needs to be resisted at all costs. The poster does a good job of communicating this important message, for sure.