Re: [sixties-l] Who Will Lead? (fwd)

From: drieux (drieux@WETWARE.COM)
Date: Tue Nov 19 2002 - 12:50:22 EST

  • Next message: "[sixties-l] Old Panthers face new fight to keep their legacy intact (fwd)"

    On Sunday, Nov 10, 2002, at 12:45 US/Pacific, jeffrey blankfort wrote:
    > Among serious activists, the organization is not taken seriously.
    > That they are
    > the only game in town is more than depressing.

    I find much in common with your general concern, since I have my
    own 'issues' with whether the GOP has decided to run on a platform
    or is merely content with the policy position of 'we are not them'...

    I'm way amused with your general analysis of the failure of the
    American Communist Party to resolve some of it's internal issues, not
    the least of which was the irony that the biggest subscriber to their
    was the american counter-intelligence community, so was it really
    more than a 'front organization' for them or the KGB.... 8-)
    { a part of why the new-left in general broke with the old guard }

    Where I am somewhat concerned is you initial assertion:

            "the bulk of those who become attracted to radical movements
            and swell its ranks, tend to drift away when the goals of the
            movement appear to have been reached."

    I can empathise with the romantic american notion that we come from
    the "great founding father's of the american revolution" but I think
    most folks in the post-sixties world are basically able to admit that
    probably no more than a third of colonial americans were actually
    involved - and on the order of a third were Tory, and the vast wasteland
    in between was trying to find their way.

    In part because I am not convinced that 'the movement' keyed itself on
    being simply 'anti-Vietnam' - or anti-war - as much as it was about
    the juxtaposition of the 'baby boomers' coming of age, and the blithe
    naivete that youth brings to the discussion. A large percentage of the
    vietnam vets dashed off on the romanticism of 'to bear any burden' in
    ways similar to those who opted to oppose the government policy on

    We saw a similar almost blithe naivete arise again with the children's
    crusade of the ' fiasco' - as

            <bigFingerQuotes> "GenXer's" </bigFingerQuotes>

    believed religiously that the solution was to be found in the e-biz
    and that their involvement in 'the internet' was going to 'change the

    Perchance the worst of all possible ironies in all of this IS the
    classical struggle between the 'new left' elements and the 'yippies'
    made geographical almost, with SF being the base for the 'turned on
    Oakland the home of the Panthers, the Free Speach Political Radicals up
    in Bezerkley - and, well, the Captain Crunch crowd wandering around
    to resolve what all could actually be done on the AT&T backbone....

    { I presume everyone knows the relationship between the 'phone phreaks'
    and the origins of corporations like Apple, and the BSD release of unix,
    and.... }

    Along the way we would also find the Jesus Movement 'radicalizing' "the
    as former 'radical types' adopted 'Chairman Jesus' and/or took to the
    bible in the same way that they had viewed other 'religious' and

    One of my friends offered up:

    > everyone--
    > <>
    > Great. Just what we need. Evangelical environmentalist Christians
    > with no public relations game. I can't wait for the backlash against
    > this to start...

    and other of my WarMongerBuds giggled about how this would inevitably
    lead to 'church/state' litigation making it illegal to have images of
    electric cars in public schools....

    What if the Politico's were Wrong? What if "everything is politics" is
    merely so much 'bumper sticker' philosophizing? Or perchance that it
    has always been 'political' - that it has always been about getting a
    co-alition together, and keeping all of the kittens from wandering

    As some of the pundit's have noted - the good news is that the GOP has
    control of the house, senate and white house.... the information is that
    they will no longer be able to blame everything on the Clintons, the
    democratic party, the... Now is their chance to resolve IF they actually
    can maintain their own political cohesion. Or are they playing the same
    consensus driven psycho-crisis of the Democrats in the sixties?

    What if this is really all about a whole new set of opportunities? As
    Republicrats shift into the vapid middle of the roaders - what if people
    start raising the questions about how to work out and define the
    for which we need something like a 'government' to regulate that the
    'commons' has been maintained for all????

    What if 'radicalism' IS about 'roots' - and we can finally get past all
    of the 'extremism' - and get back to our 'roots'. With a Third looking
    forward, a Third looking backwards, { hey someone can work out whether
    the champions of 'back to the sixties' are radicals or reactionaries }
    and a Third of them are merely wandering around trying to make ends



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sun Nov 24 2002 - 18:15:26 EST