Compared to the last American government of course, the Obama administration is quite responsive to public opinion. But, to be frank, it should be clear by now that Obama’s policies are miles away from taking measures to dismantle the empire, take care of the poor in your country, set up single payer health care, or implement a crucial emergency rescue plan for energy and climate, for instance. The crucial question therefore, I think, is not what the current administration is proposing and doing, but rather what American activists will be able to achieve in the present historic window of opportunity. As Christopher Hayes expressed a similar optimism: "history is pointing in our direction". So in this article I would like to address the strategy of the American left, the vital actors who put pressure on the only state that can on its own seriously change the course of world politics.
I am of course not alone in calling for the active citizens of the US to think about the most effective way to act in the longer term. For example, former UN weapons inspector and anti-war drill sergeant Scott Ritter stated that the anti-war movement needs to reinvent itself:
“It is high time for the anti-war movement to take a collective look in the mirror, and be honest about what they see. A poorly organized, chaotic, and indeed often anarchic conglomeration of egos, pet projects and idealism that barely constitutes a "movement," let alone a winning cause.” ('The Art of War for the Anti-War Movement')
Ritter is often a little harsh and rigid to my taste, and understandably suffered from some culture shock after siding with anti-authoritarian activists, he does have an important point. I think it can help all of us to be shouted at by people like him from time to time. Not because activist groups need to organize in a military manner per se, but to become better at strategic forward thinking; setting objectives, and consequently figuring out concrete ways to achieve them. There is, however, one crucial issue he does not address: the need to formulate an independent radical vision of and for society. Strategic action is always a means to an end, it by definition only makes sense if it is instrumental to a larger goal. The task for the left is to formulate this alternative vision for society.
So the left does not only need to reinvent itself organizationally, but also ideologically. Theory is a necessary first step to opening up political possibility. These times of proliferation of crises should be used first and foremost to return to the fundamental questions and critiques of capitalist social relations, the state and its relation to capital, democracy in the economic sphere, the relation between the economy and the natural environment, alienation and consumer society and so on. The ongoing search for forms of collective action that transcend the now all too apparent shortcomings of liberal democratic capitalism is what needs to give the left a lasting sense of direction.
But in the mean time, reforms are urgently necessary to open space for radical ideas. Electoral reform and environmental reform are two illustrations of this necessity. Electoral reform is needed to break open the two party system, to show that the Democrats or the Republicans are not the only political options. And whatever society one would like to see take form, it will have to live with natural constraints like climate change, depletion of natural resources; in short the limits to growth. Our current transgression of the limits to growth is one fundamental difference between the situation in the 1930s and today. As a consequence of these new concerns, I would argue, the American left will have to seriously press for reform while engaging in a fundamental debate of self-reinvention. The issue is therefore not whether you should take a step back and think or act immediately out of a sense of urgency, but rather how to combine the two activities.
To determine a way to start realizing those long-term visions, it is helpful to think in terms of social processes. Quite understandably, the last eight years of the Bush administration evoked a serious amount of popular disenfranchisement; resulting in passive apathy but also active resistance. The depression and the bailouts have also motivated people to protest in the streets of New York, London and Strasbourg. People power has been on the rise lately. If the process of disenfranchisement continues during the Obama administration, it could very well become the foundation for a commonplace independent activist citizenry on the longer term, in which citizens organize, self-educate and determine their own course rather than limiting themselves to passively endorsing the Democrats, the Republicans, or being apathetic. The two essential missing ingredients are active organization and critical theory.
For some time, the campaign and election of Barack Obama took away a lot of energy from the movements. Especially in the weeks following the election the Obamania was absolutely intolerable. But lately, popular discussion and pressure increased by mainstream media is forcing him into a dilemma. If I understand the significance of the torture memoranda debate correctly, there are two possible outcomes. In the most likely case, Obama will keep to his line of only 'looking forward' and stop short of prosecuting those responsible for the torture under Bush (and during his own presidency! Democracy Now reported that since the closing of Guantanamo was announced, the treatment of prisoners there worsened significantly), which means he will bend and twist to keep the torture conspirators above the law. Such preferential treatment would be another sign that real change can only be the result of pressure from below, as was shown by the conservative staff appointments, the intensification of the war in Afghanistan, the silence during the Gaza siege, the Geithner plan, etcetera. Pressure would have to increase for the Obama government to make the changes that are necessary, pressure that will only come from your actions and patience.
The other possibility is that Obama shows himself willing to give in to pressure from below on issues that can draw on widespread coverage and popular support, and really allow prosecution. Just imagine Dick Cheney, Condi Rice and Donald Rumsfeld as defendants in court! That would be an amazing victory, again not for the Obama government, but for the American people; earned especially by those who have made the case for justice and fought for years to get to the truth of the matter.
If anything, this debate shows there is a chance to realize successes. The Obama administration is predictably wriggling around and torturing logic in avoidance of making powerful enemies, so do not be fooled into passivity if he will not go through with prosecution of those who allowed and committed torture. But there will be new chances. Anyone who has read books by Chomsky will know that there is no short supply of issues on which the policy elite, Republican or Democrat, opposes the views of a wide majority of the American population. Herein lies possibility of reform not only for the sake of reform itself, but also to show that another world is possible.
So what I would like to convey to you is this: for your own countries’ sake and for people around the world, self-educate and become effective. While engaging in the necessary ideological debates on the bigger picture, join an activist group if you haven’t already. Get into touch with other groups on a national level, coordinate and pick a topic to campaign on, have patience and try to use the mainstream media as your own platform. I am not saying that this will be easy, but when the chance is there, you have to be able to take it and use it well. Because, as we see in the recent debate on torture, it actually is possible to get even Fox News hosts to unequivocally denounce torture and call for prosecution of those responsible. You may not agree with how Shephard Smith puts his argument -“If we are to be Reagan’s shining city on the hill..”- but he was able to suddenly disrupt the indoctrination of millions of your countrymen. His broadcast outrage was as politically valuable a service as countless hours’ worth of organizing, licking envelopes, sending emails, having meetings and staging rallies. The trouble so often is, you need to latter to have the former; the very fact that Obama released the memoranda or that Shephard Smith felt the need to denounce torture to such a degree, are the sweet fruits of effective activism. Never forget that you, the active citizens of the US, are the real superpower.
Freek Blauwhof is a philosophy student and member of the Dutch Green Party, as well as the International Socialists.
Posts
I like the call to action and the point to choose a cause to go for- there are so many, so much we need to change. I have lived in USA all my life, if you have any specific questions you can ask me. I will say that we have green party here but not many people seem to join it because in a lot of states you can't vote in the primaries and most candidates are still either democrat or republican.
ReplyDeleteI'd like to know whether there is some real cause for urgency among common people, i mean first hand experience from new orleans, detroit, or in other telling places, to understand the 17% unemployment figre(calculated in the 1930s method, and not Clintons). How it feels in the streets to live in such an unequal country. How angry people are. That kind of thing.
ReplyDeleteI can tell you that just about everyone I know has been hit in some way by the recession. The place I am working has had hours cut severly, some staff fired, some places much worse. Microsoft(which is near me) had layoffs and severly affected 3 of my roommates, who all had to move to find jobs. Some places have been hit much harder. There seems to be a common feeling that things will improve(maybe a hope). Funding has been cut severly a lot of places, which is good, more people being frugal, learning to do with less. My roommates are all immigrants so there is some anger at that aspect. Money for "extras" like art definitely dried up has affected me quite a bit as well, although I don't know if full awareness of what is going on is out there, people here seem to still hope things will go "back to normal". Just my persepctive.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWow.. sounds quite surreal.. And how big is the gap between what the media are prepared to show about the state of the economy for the average person and what is really happening? Is there class consciousness developing?
ReplyDeleteI think it depends on the media outlet. I tend to avoid CNN and the "Fixed" (Fox) Network. For me, at least, MSNBC seems to provide a picture more consistent with what ozjthomas has described and which I can absolutely corroborate, from personal and shared anecdotes as well as from labor and economic facts.
ReplyDeleteSo far I found:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.thenation.com/
http://www.progressive.org/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/
http://www.counterpunch.org/
http://www.talkleft.com/
http://www.prospect.org/
http://www.buzzflash.com/
http://www.aclu.org/
http://www.juancole.com/
http://www.truthout.org/
http://thinkprogress.org/
http://www.commondreams.org/
http://www.alternet.org/
http://www.fpif.org/
http://americas.irc-online.org/
I think that one thing the american left needs to be doing right now is questioning a lot of the assumptions about politics, democracy and capitalism that have sustained it for the past 30 years. For too long the "left" has fought to defend the last vestiges of the welfare state through applying pressure on elected politicians, to fight for some sort of vague reinstatement of a Keynesian "rising-tide-lifts-all-boats" ethic, and to pursue a politic of inclusive multi-culturalism which treats "tolerance" as the ultimate political ideal.
ReplyDeleteThough we are faced with desperate situations in this country, I think it is a mistake to act desperately- to fall back into these same failed patterns of action- without thinking critically about the world. We are in a crisis. A crisis is a time of breaks with the past and a radical reconstruction of the future. It seems unlikely that a non-capitalist future will emerge from this crisis, but that doesn't mean that a rejuvenated left can't reform itself now. If that is to happen we have to return to radical critiques of capitalist social relations, and to creative visions of social change. My criticism of this article, Freek, is that it contains this desperate call to action but seems to imply a return to the failed leftist tactics of the past w/o any sort of new vision or critique. Who cares about pressuring Obama to do this or that mild reform? The welfare state of the Great Depression emerged as a capitalist response to radical communist and labor movements in the US. These movements had a radical critique of the social order and proposed a vastly different society that threatened the capitalist class and forced it to attempt to forge a new, more human concept of the capitalist state. Today's left needs this sort of critique if it is to have any effect at all on the outcomes of this crisis.
If anything I would urge today's left to not go out and act. The left needs to study. Get your local activist group to sit down and read Das Kapital for a few months. I could think of nothing more crucial right now than theory, analysis and critique. What is the point in doing if you don't know what you are doing?
Hmm.. I can see where you're coming from kapitalism.. good point. I could get your point in there maybe, it does seem that I should not leave this argument out. I guess I assumed that theory and self-education is a necessary part of the struggle.. that's the point of this blog here anyway, as well as the group I myself am active in; the International Socialists..
ReplyDeleteBut I guess it's a complementary thing.. You can drive through reforms with precise actions while at the same time studying on what the ultimate point is to all this activism. On that point, I think, we agree wholeheartedly.
There's a couple of things though that make me think that pushing for reforms is more crucial now than before. One is that the left needs to show that there's a possibility of success. Revolutionary situations also don't fall from the sky; there needs to be a lot of mobilising and more minor struggle before you get there.
The other is that with the coming depression, that will deepen with peak oil, is that grass roots activism and with that the Green party might gain serious support. I do think that would be a significant thing. For that energy to get channeled, however, there needs to be some electoral reform.
In a generic sense activism and being heard "as a group' is a noble,pure,and necessary endeavor. When we collectively stand up for a certain cause are we not at that moment forming "exclusivity"? If we are forming an adversarial position Against someone or something than we risk falling into the same process of "us against them" (generally one political party against another)and that my friends we cant win!
ReplyDeleteThe "activism' is just a result of real living,by that I mean whatever cause your taking up,1st live the cause for a while. Stop talking too much about subjects and live them in a literal sense,not virtual. The longer we DO something as opposed to pondering it,that will give us passion to forward motion our ideas(but they MUST be good ideas to thrive,unless you want to be part of the problem and sell out your ideas for money or fame)we see many groups taking up causes,but the ones, as we can all see that get things done are many times more result oriented than vocal,(Jehovah Witness,Mormons for example)
Speaking to people intimately,in person is more powerful than activism,you see if they believe,they will go on to tell someone else,but they will only believe if we are a result of the idea we are trying to defend. Otherwise we are just another "group" trying to get their agenda,its like selling,convincing(very lame)
We are living among many starters and few finishers. Groups can be dangerous,stand up for yourself first and foremost.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI've thought about this distinction between those who make the liberal calls of urgency: "Don't think, do something now!" and those who see the need for theory and shaping a radical perspective. I have share this disappointment with this empty call for action.
ReplyDeleteBut my cries of urgency arise from a conviction that they are especially necessary in this point in time. I think somehow this antithesis needs to be transcended, mainly because of ecological concerns. As I understand the scientific discussion of climate change, the world is either 20 years past or almost at the great tipping point at which the world ecosystem will be led by positive feedback loops,taking the matter out of human hands. Also, there is still an opportunity now to prepare for the economic shock of peak oil; in 10 years or so we'll be living with it. These are pressing issues now that determine what any possible future society might look like.
So I hope that these two things can be combined. We need organised struggle on 'reforms', meaning radical carbon cuts and redesigning the entire economic infrastructure, but with a developing understanding of an end-goal, a critical imagining of utopia that gives direction to action.
I am changing my article at the moment to give due response to your valid argument, Brendan. Thanks for the response.
Freek, I agree that there needs to be some sort of dialectical tension between theory and praxis. I also realize that it sometimes easier to theorize and criticize than it is engage in action. I also agree that the ecological crisis seems to demand immediate action- or that it may even be too late already. But I also think the left has been seriously hindered by a lack of theoretical focus- that too often we are told that social critique is not practical or useful- that theory is only useful if it can translate into immediate action and immediate results.
ReplyDeleteIn terms of the environmental crisis here is an example of how I think theory can be of use in developing long-term, anti-capitalist political strategy: I am quite fascinated by two parallel arguments by Marx in Das Kapital. 1. In the chapter on Large Scale Industry he talks about the way in which changes in technical forces (machines) have rippling effects throughout 19th century Europe, rapidly transforming the organization of production and all of social life. The new forces of production were constrained by the old social relations and society was forced to revolutionize these social relations to make way for a new type of worker, a new type of capitalist enterprise, and eventually a new concept of money and a new capitalist state. When we make demands for a new green infrastructure what will be the effects on society? What kind of work, enterprise, state etc. will come out of a green economy? Could there be space for some sort of non-capitalist social relations? Here is a space for a lot of theoretical work.
2. Marx's concept of the falling rate of profit. I believe this is useful not just in explaining crisis but also in explaining the current dead-lock we are dealing with in intellectual property. When labor is eliminated from a task it looses all of its value, becoming impossible to extract profits from. Thus, when computers can duplicate and distribute information with the click of a button, the only thing that is left to give value to a piece of music, or any other commodity is the intellectual work that went into creating it. But this intellectual piece can only create profit to the extent that there is some arbitrary legal framework to preserve a copyright... basically a narrow legal enclosure around what we increasingly see as a social process of knowledge production and distribution that can't create profits. I believe there might be an inherent crisis of profitability in intellectual property production and that we might see all sorts of class struggle around intellectual property in our life time. In terms of green politics, I wonder if the forces of production could evolve in a similar way: is there an absolute limit to green energy beyond which sustained profits are impossible? Isn't the point of green energy "free energy"- to harness solar, wind and thermal energy in ways that use the free forces of nature as energy sources instead of labor-intensive non-renewable sources? Certainly there is a lot of money to be made in the short run in building a green infrastructure. But is long-run profitability possible if the energy source is not dependent on human labor to renew it every day? Here there is much theoretical work to be done.
If you are still looking for a site that extracts from the press genuine news for the US, try the Information Clearing House Newsletter. They send a daily email.
ReplyDeletehttp://informationclearinghouse.info/article22727.htm
(at the bottom)