We have said all along that a time of chaotification is coming, and in the US it has come already. We have created a basic socialist model that is benign, postmarxist, but quite ready to challenge to fascist turn to what is really counterrevolution. Our model learns from but disowns the marxist legacy which will produce instant conflict from more than just the right. This model will be able to mediate reformism/revolution/chaos and will be set to appeal to those who can see that democracy really requires a soft socialism and a new kind of economy/politics. This approach pulls a rabbit out of a hat, and it is a pretty tough rabbit at that: we offer failsafed revolutionary action, and/or reformist minimalism: our DMNC could get set in place with one or two sets of laws passed as legislation.
These options are still long shots but the situation follows a dialectical mystery: instead of active passive reconciliation we are watching the ‘passive’ (here the demonic right), reconciliation, active: chaos/fascism, mediation of opposites, an active response on the left.
We have critiqued the left, but here we see the use of a different brand. More latter, or make a paper airplane there. But have renounced dialectical thinking, but here it pops out in a new form:
as Bennett shows there are six triads of dialectical logic: Active, Passive, Reconciliation, APR, And:
ARP, PAR, RAP, R….etc…this may be the last time we use this, but our notion seems relevant to our present as a version of triadic process. Forget I mentioned it.
The issue is that the right is undermining itself and creating a future for its opposite. The WWI/bolshevism seems to have followed a similar dialectic. Our approach is better because it has a model this is holistic from the start: democracy and socialism. The Bolshevik era saw the collision of an attempted liberal democracy and a Bolshevik ‘coup’ or transition. Our model unites the two opposites one: DMNC, and be able to establish itself more coherently at the start.
We have been repeating over and over the need to move beyond Marxism to a new framework.
We have produced several here, on the spot. Perhaps incomplete. And the issue of Kantian ethics should be brought in.
Decoding World History shows how to move on from historical materialism: use its empirical chronology and avoid theory.
The core of world history shows a mystery, but we can see that the right context is that of evolution, but teleological in a special sense.
Man’s evolution is guided evolution operating over immense time-scales. Then all of a sudden the macro stops and man is alone in his own history
A dangerous moment. We see the danger in the decline of the ancient world from its brilliant stating point(s).
Continue reading “A new framework for the left? Revolution in history and the eonic model… round and round on a jargon merry-go-round….”
The problem with this argument is that the American Revolution, if it was to save slavery would never have allowed democracy but would have created oligarchy (which it did to some extent in the stealth action of the slaveholding elite present at the creation of the Constitution). But democracy appeared and the American Revolution emerged as a republic moving into democracy in a compromise with slavery that a Constitution with a hidden dynamite charge would lead to a Civil War in a generation. The argument that a compromise was forced onto the process seems closer to the facts. Why would a slaveholder republic declare all men were created equal?
We should consider that Britain was not beyond slavery in 1776.1785 (1807, 1833, the relevant dates) and that they also were concerned rightly the new Americans would be genocidal to the Indians.
Again, to see the half-truth only in this argument: consider Athenian democracy: was it founded to preserve slavery? Hardly, there was no challenge to slavery but democracy emerged somewhat chaotically but on its own terms. The Americans looked to the past and the example of Greece/Rome seemed to condition their views.
The University of South Carolina historian holds that the American Revolution was launched to defend the institution of slavery against the British Empire.
Ten years ago today, on September 17, 2011, a small band of anarchists, artists, and anti-poverty organizers convened themselves in Zuccotti Park in downtown Manhattan, steps from the New York Stock Exchange. They were there to challenge the power of Wall Street and also to try something new in the annals of modern American protest movements: to be a democratic assembly of all who wanted to participate in deciding how and what they would do next. On their first night together that Saturday, perhaps 100 or 200 at best camped out under the park’s 55 honey locust trees.
I just blew fourteen bucks on this book: if the climate crisis is that bad the book should be for free. In fact, I have been reading this book for the last forty years as the climate experts denounce the climate crisis parameters, make statements implying the situation is hopeless and unsaid that it requires/implies revolution (without mentioning revolution) and then retreat into tweedle dee mode. It is people like me who will have to fight that revolution while the academic potty thinkers ruminate and preen their Gandhian saintly feathers. In fact, all these ‘progressives are the same: they imply contexts, then have a non-violent preening moment, and then we await the next article from Common Dreams. Will Mann please either shut up or suggest some kind of revolutionary tactic?
I was about to say that the situation has passed no return, but strangely the recent calamity of IDA has once again produced the chorus of the handwringers and for the first time that I can recall CNN bench comment actually referenced the connection of IDA to climate change. Amazing! Is this progress? Revolution? Mann’s last option, go down fighting, kamikaze. is Jan 6 a model, premonition, some sort of trial run. I think leftists have let the Jan 6 alt-right steal their thunder.
At some point, even the Bidens will have to act and seemed to be doing so, into the mike. Again, should the left storm the capital? but do it right this time: they should reach Bernie Sanders office and take him, prisoner, as a revolutionary frontman, parroting ‘Our Revolution’, with a bloodthirsty look, cf. Madame Lafarge in the movie. I can see the inevitable, will have to do it all by myself. Unfortunately, I don’t have the bus fare to reach Washington.
Progressives, and the left in general, might consider that the ‘revolutionary’ slot has been ripped off by the right, and while the indignation against the alt-right’s Capitol caper has been morally quite indignant the deeper suspicion is that the immense tide of revolutionary thinking/ideology has subsided only to resurface as fascism: a variant no doubt of the kind of reversal we see in the emergence of fascism/nazism. The left is completely paralyzed and unable to proceed beyond slogans.
We have plus/minused the Berniac movement many times since 2016. We might again note that the strategy makes complete sense on the surface but over time suffers the obvious flaw of getting nowhere.…
We have plus/minused the Berniac movement many times since 2016. We might again note that the strategy makes complete sense on the surface but over time suffers the obvious flaw of getting nowhere. To absorb revolutionary intent into reformist logic is either a brilliant strategy or a deception that in the end serves the status quo.
By the same token the strategy will finally lead to an actual breakout into revolution so defined, too late no doubt. What are the actual results of this strategy that has coopted ‘our revolution’?
This tactic backfires and we see that ‘our revolution’ as a potential has shifted to the alt-right and mirabile dictu a real if hare-brained effort to stage an actual revolutionary insurrection–from the right
Our Revolution members from coast to coast are carrying out our 4-POINT PLAN to fight for a progressive future. From coast to coast, we’re organizing to #1) Defeat Trump by winning back working-class voters in the Midwest; #2) Elect a progressive Congress #3) Build a down-ballot bench of progressive champions and policies; and most critically, #4) Organize a powerful grassroots movement inside the halls of power and outside in the streets to win transformative change after the election!
Source: Our Revolution
This is a revolutionary situation and yet the left is fractured and paralyzed. The current range of governments is so dominated by capitalists that it can’t act to save a planet, while the left is hardly better. The revolutionary left does nothing by chatter about some future transition from capitalism in Marx’s misleading theory.
The truth is that the situation demands intervention and a strong challenge, but instead we confront without challenge an almost demented political culture on the right and a completely hypocritical gang of goofs on the so-called democratic left, with a progressive wing that is not capable on much more than editorials of the Commondreams type.
“The alarm bells are deafening, and the evidence is irrefutable: greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuel burning and deforestation are choking our planet and putting billions of people at immediate risk.”
To ‘rise up’ means to revolt, but the current left is so anemic that the jargon is barely possible, let alone rising up. The marxist left is paralyzed, and the rest is stuck in a gandhian fantasy of non-violent change.
Let’s repeat, to rise up is a statement about ‘revolution’ but the idea has been so botched that it is stuck forever at the level of the whisper.
Ironically, the Alt-Right has seized the idea of insurrection with tragi-comic results.
On the left, it is barely possible to even stage a protest march, pathetic…
“This is the moment to rise up, be bold, and think big,” Kosonen added. “We all need to accelerate the green transition while ensuring justice and protection for local communities and people paying the highest cost for climate inaction.”