[Marxism] The criticism of religion[was:RE:Vnzla:reasonstobeoptimistic]
lnp3 at panix.com
Wed Aug 29 06:58:03 MDT 2007
Haines Brown wrote:
> You to bring up what on the surface appears to be a valid point, but
> it must be looked at carefully.
> Indeed, the Democratic Party (and all other parties) are to a large
> extent ultimately subservient to capitalist interests, but:
> a) This overlooks the enormous complexity and diversity in the party
> at the national, state and local levels. It is not really "top down"
> except in electoral campaigns, such as I experienced when I was
> state treasurer for a presidential candidate may years
> ago. Otherwise it would be a gross simplification to suggest that
> the Party is top down.
There is no doubt that the dynamic around electing a city council member
in Madison, Wisconsin is much different than electing a Senator from
that state but it is the Senator who makes decisions that can lead to
disasters like Iraq or more restrictive immigration.
> e) One can't become politically engaged without implicitly
> supporting the capitalist system. A militant demonstration over an
> issue in effect lends the capitalist order legitimacy and a reform
> effort serves to perpetuate it.
So when French students and workers rose up against DeGaulle in 1968,
they were lending the capitalist order legitimacy? And when DeGaulle
sought to defuse the movement by promising reforms in a new election, he
didn't see the distinction himself? And when the CP of France, in
defiance of the student movement and the rank-and-file working class
revolt, decided to take DeGaulle up on his maneuver and get people off
the streets, they too could not make such a distinction? Something tells
me that they were more afraid of revolution than they were of DeGallue.
> Third party or independent politics is, of course always valid option,
> but we must realize that it does not lift us out of the capitalist
> system or separate us from imperialism. You may not expect to win an
> election, but you can at least raise consciousness or build a
> movement. If that happens, excellent, but it is still within the
> capitalist system. However, to take this route when you know very well
> that you will achieve none of these outcomes borders on the insane or,
> less charitably, is self-indulgent petite-bourgeois adventurism.
Here's a taste of some self-indulgent petite-bourgeois adventurism:
Camejo's Five-Point Plan
Peter Miguel Camejo has presented a five-point plan to increase the
state of California's revenues by 32.6 billion dollars a year while
lowering taxes for 60% of our people.
He will ask Steve Westly, Phil Angelides, Arnold Schwarzenegger and
Barbara Becnel for a one to one meeting to urge them to support his plan
that makes it possible to solve all the major issues of our state,
improve education, stop all cut backs of needed social programs, plan
and rebuild our infrastructure, start a massive march for alternative
energy and to lower the excessive taxes on the average citizen.
FIVE-POINT PROGRAM TO INCREASE REVENUES BY 32 BILLION DOLLARS A YEAR
1. THE RICHEST 5% SHOULD PAY THE SAME TAX RATE THE POOREST 20% PAY.
ADDS 10 BILLION DOLLARS A YEAR.
2. ESTABLISH SINGLE-PAYER UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE. ADDS 7.6 BILLION
DOLLARS A YEAR.*
3. STOP ALL LOOP HOLES AND TAX FRAUD. ADDS 7 BILLION A YEAR.
4. RETURN CORPORATE TAXES TO WHAT THEY WERE 20 YEARS AGO. ADDS 5
BILLION DOLLARS A YEAR.
5. RAISE THE MINIMUM WAGE TO WHAT IT WAS IN 1968. ADDS 3 BILLION
DOLLARS A YEAR.
THIS FIVE POINT PROGRAM ADDS 25 BILLION DOLLARS TO OUR BUDGET IN
More information about the Marxism