discipline posted:babyhueypnewton posted:It doesn't explain why Occupy mobilized a whole section of the population which normally doesn't participate in any political process, and why Occupy expanded so far beyond the typical anarchist lifestyle squatters.
I don't know BHPN it sort of appealed to this generation of hyper-individualized thrill seekers. low commitment. feeling important. on the cusp of history. brag to ur friends. get on tv. smoke a doob.
this is uncharitable bullshit fyi
discipline posted:I mean if I had to sum up this generation in two words it would be "commitment averse." People have no desire to settle or commit to anything, because we are constantly being told that we can have it all, and this is what drives the Man (aka system). People don't marry but will live together for years because of fear of commitment, nobody will sign up to any political program because of the same thing. Obama really utilized that - campaigns were low-pressure, could pick up their phone and put it down at will. Even if they are riding your ass at work, you have the illusion of being able to work from home or remotely, you can float projects. You throw away your clothing once a month, your smart phone once a year. People buy disposable cheap furniture. How many people do you know read a book from start to finish in the last year? This is reflective of our system of economy that demands a constant realignment with a new thing or cause to keep production moving. Multitasking is reflective of a changing workforce and focus of life. Accordingly, our political movements are expected to be ADHD friendly, we are supposed to be able to indulge as much as we like and no more, take no responsibility and make no commitment.
Yeah these are all characteristic of a labor-aristocratic financial capitalist world system. People have been saying this since the 60s, this is basically the post-modern politics of surface and appearance which post-modernism is itself a result of.
If that's what people are, then that's who we have to appeal to. I see no difference between 'Marxists' who complain that the revolution is made of peasants and not the working class and therefore can't make Communism and yourself, complaining about how people are too selfish, too privileged, too racist and sexist when the chips are down, to ever make a real left movement. Let's deal with reality instead of how we wish reality was, this is the greatest success of OWS (which is ironic of course because OWS was based on propaganda and incomplete or wrong political and economic analysis. nobody said OWS succeeded intentionally).
Of course you could be Third worldist, but only the lazy MTW people think we can do nothing except massacre those selfish citizens of the 1st world. We may not be able to make a Marxist revolution in the USA quite yet, but we can deal with politics as materialists and approach the people as they are.
discipline posted:I view people as dignified and intelligent thinkers who have the ability to do all sorts of cool stuff. I think appealing to them as idiots is cynical.
I'm not doing that. I'm saying that we know what was wrong with Occupy, it's the same problems that anarchist and feminist movements have had since the 70s and the degeneration of the Marxist left. You haven't really said much new except some nonsense about 'the twitter generation'. There is an audience for that, like you said the leadership went off and wrote books about how awesome OWS was, and at the time OWS could do no wrong. Even Zizek sucked up hardcore to them, and Chomsky who has nothing but bad words for the USSR was full of praise.
But we're not that audience. There seems to be a lot of negativity from the radical left (just read any thread on Revleft about Occupy) and pure positivity from OWS itself (which still thinks stuff like 'Occupy Sandy' is anything), but I have yet to see anyone seriously evaluate what was good and what was bad, and what Occupy means for the limits of politics in the labor aristocracy and how we can move beyond those limits.
babyhueypnewton posted:Of course you could be Third worldist, but only the lazy MTW people think we can do nothing except massacre those selfish citizens of the 1st world. We may not be able to make a Marxist revolution in the USA quite yet, but we can deal with politics as materialists and approach the people as they are.
Well someones gonna have to get massacred. and people generally want to know up front who it is. So why the procrastination.
and what Occupy means for the limits of politics in the labor aristocracy and how we can move beyond those limits.
we can't
all we can do is spread the word of allah and watch the sparks fly
mustang19 posted:and what Occupy means for the limits of politics in the labor aristocracy and how we can move beyond those limits.
we can't
all we can do is spread the word of allah and watch the sparks fly
Yeah i don't mean the rich first world is gonna create the JDPON. Just that there's a difference between what's possible in the USA, what's possible in France, what's possible in Greece, and what's possible in Mexico, all of which could be considered labor aristocratic. We no longer live in a time when a welfare state and bribery of the skilled proletariat is possible, it's time to look at what will be possible instead of what was impossible.
babyhueypnewton posted:mustang19 posted:and what Occupy means for the limits of politics in the labor aristocracy and how we can move beyond those limits.
we can't
all we can do is spread the word of allah and watch the sparks flyYeah i don't mean the rich first world is gonna create the JDPON. Just that there's a difference between what's possible in the USA, what's possible in France, what's possible in Greece, and what's possible in Mexico, all of which could be considered labor aristocratic. We no longer live in a time when a welfare state and bribery of the skilled proletariat is possible, it's time to look at what will be possible instead of what was impossible.
if you're a marxist you're literally supporting terrorists. the sooner we embrace this fact the better. stop talking about ows because al qaeda is the most active third worldist organization in america.
Obama said in the audacity of hope "I serve as a blank screen on which people of vastly different political stripes project their views.”
when he turned out to be a disappointment, people constructed Occupy to serve this purposes instead
Ironicwarcriminal posted:Occupy is simple to explain
Obama said in the audacity of hope "I serve as a blank screen on which people of vastly different political stripes project their views.”
when he turned out to be a disappointment, people constructed Occupy to serve this purposes instead
no it was a bunch of history majors who didnt want to pay back thgeir loans
jools posted:babyhueypnewton posted:Well from what I heard London Occupy was terrible, much worse than New York. Most of the criticisms here of OWS are shallow and are the same criticisms everyone made before the movement even begun. Obviously OWS was lliberal and was limited by its ideology and tactics, but it also had many successes and provided a lot for the left to discuss in terms of tactics and propaganda.
Marx's criticism of the Paris Commune wasn't "they didn't seize the banks stupid n00bs LOL"bhpn is right
NO i'm right, did ya MISS it??:
Crow posted:Ows failed cuz of the time a cop said, "Savages. The lot of them. Exterminate the brutes." And the other cop was like, "Gee willickers a-Doydoy," and clobbered himself on the head with his steel baton, rattling his lips with his finger a blubber, spit spraying from his maw. And that's why ows failed
jools posted:discipline posted:babyhueypnewton posted:It doesn't explain why Occupy mobilized a whole section of the population which normally doesn't participate in any political process, and why Occupy expanded so far beyond the typical anarchist lifestyle squatters.
I don't know BHPN it sort of appealed to this generation of hyper-individualized thrill seekers. low commitment. feeling important. on the cusp of history. brag to ur friends. get on tv. smoke a doob.
this is uncharitable bullshit fyi
you WANT to know what is UNCHARITABLE, FUCKING, BULLSHIT?? how about FUCKING ignoring THIS:
Crow posted:Ows failed cuz of the time a cop said, "Savages. The lot of them. Exterminate the brutes." And the other cop was like, "Gee willickers a-Doydoy," and clobbered himself on the head with his steel baton, rattling his lips with his finger a blubber, spit spraying from his maw. And that's why ows failed
FYI
discipline posted:I'm not complaining about the masses. I'm complaining about the leadership which has its head up its ass. I'm complaining that people are so cynical they feel like they should go ahead and tart up their political ideas like the newest viral marketing campaign in order to get the masses on board. The point is that the masses, at the end of the day, WEREN'T on board. It was all fluff. The popular will was there, that's why they were able to exist, but once the people saw they were more about pissing in public and having a good time while being unfocused and undisciplined as hell, no one was going to put their ass on the line for a bunch of rich kids.
lol if you think every non-Black Panthers leftist movement in America hasnt been this since the 1950s. the OWS failure was not in allowing rich white kids into the club, it was in not distracting them with meaningless, perfunctory, but ultimately inclusion-breeding tasks while exploiting the shit out of their connections and daddy's credit cards at every available opportunity. its like none of them ever threw a party in high school
and while you should obviously feel comfortable discussing these things here in the likeminded company of the Parti communiste électronique, im not sure what good airing all this dirty laundry to the rest of the watching world is going to do for anything other than your own self-promotion and pending employment at Jezebel.com
mustang19 posted:PSL
lol the revolution will occur through electoral means and voting advances the cause of communism lol
is a thing the PSL never said
discipline posted:jools posted:this is uncharitable bullshit fyi
sorry, that's not to say that there aren't good people too. they're just cramming their ideas into 140 or less characters per twitter post because that's how they think it's gonna happen.
They weren't really the occupy movement though since the movement also organised large demonstrations which got mass coverage and was linked into a deeper and importantly active struggle all of which had an effect.
Even if the collection of twitter people were sometimes propped up as important by the structures of the movement they were just a reflection of its on off attempts at constructing something coherent and to judge them by that is at best revolutionary laziness or at worse opportunism wrapped in an anti revisionist banner.
Edited by SovietFriends ()
discipline posted:I don't know BHPN it sort of appealed to this generation of hyper-individualized thrill seekers. low commitment. feeling important. on the cusp of history. brag to ur friends. get on tv. smoke a doob.
much like your posting
