chris_brady at SPAMearthling.net
Tue Jun 6 12:55:10 MDT 2000
Chris Carrick chided: Now is the time for creativity on our parts,
not for holding on to categories passed down from Marx.
I agree with the first bit, but find his conclusion to be a
somewhat odd suggestion to the MARXIST list
I like his suggestion about developing class consciousness out of
revelations concerning the moral pitfalls of the military-industrial
complex, or the auto-maker/petroleum/road construction complex, etc.
But I would have to agree with Carrol about the Naderite groups
organizing categories of citizen and consumer-- both exclusive and
not inclusive notions. We have to get over such privileges as devolve
from rights under the aegis of a state rooted in violence and
privatization, and transcend the limitations imposed by bourgeoisies
around the world to keep us divided.
Carrick asks: Wasn't the 'genius' of the Fordist system the turning of
workers into consumers in order to put off the crisis of overproduction?
Doesn't consumption complete the circuit of capital accumulation?
Isn't the act of consumption tremendously important for environmental
concerns? Isn't it possible to start with consumption and then move
into matters of production, and might that not be a way to organize
segments of the working class not traditionally reached by unions or
We might consider that it is possible to begin the measurement of a
circle at any point in its circumference. We can initiate our
arguments for socialism just about anywhere. So do so.
Recognize the heuristic potential of Naderism and move on.
Point made. Develop the next.
Another writer asserted: to make sure that consumers know that
corporations don't give a rats ass about safety is something that is a
rude awakening for many...
True, and then: car-makers simply cannot be nice, or they will go under.
We really do have to follow up and drive our line of reasoning to
the conclusion that the current economic system is an inhuman absurdity.
Cars unsafe at any speed should become a symbol of capitalism itself:
a social order that is harmful either at the speed-up of laissez-faire
or under the guises of gradualism (e.g., progressivism, social democracy
Forget about Ralph. If Nader introduced you to ideas that got you to
the point where you realize that we require basic, substantial change
in our socioeconomic order, then he is to be thanked. But Ralph Nader
does not make it that far himself at any speed. So get over it.
And help others to get over it as well.
Mark Jones' polemic on dirt is fundamental: bottle refunds will not
save us. Tin can recycling will not save us. Saving some trees wont
save us nor the forest. Our entire industrial procedure must be
We must convert our entire mode of production.
That is: We need a revolution. For our own good.
How? Sooner or later you must confront that Marxist category of class.
More information about the Marxism