Breaking through the "realism" barrier

[RedSquare]

Recently a acquaintance of mine discussed about voting in the upcoming elections, and said he was thinking of voting for a left wing party, albeit a reformist one, but was unsure about their policies being realistic. I told him what I thought, and how I thought there policies were sensible compared to the right wing opposition.

However, it got me thinking. People are clearly scared of left wing economic policies, there's a fear (an irrational one in my opinion) of bankruptcy, poverty, and whatever else the international capitalist overlords can throw at a country which rejects their policy.

So if they're fearful of the consequences of reformist policies, how can they be turned to policies which would tear down the system? Precedent shows that such moves led to the invasion of sovereign nations and the usurping of democracy when a candidate who wasn't capitalist approved won some of the freest and fairest elections?

[NGNM85]

Recently a acquaintance of mine discussed about voting in the upcoming elections, and said he was thinking of voting for a left wing party, albeit a reformist one, but was unsure about their policies being realistic. I told him what I thought, and how I thought there policies were sensible compared to the right wing opposition.

This is certainly an important question, however, it is not the only question. Presuming you live in the United States, or Western Europe, I think there are a number of essential questions one has to answer;

What kind of election is it? (Is it a state election, a national election? Is it a primary? Etc.)

What do the polls show? Who seems to be gaining ground?

What kind of state/district/etc., do you live in? (‘Red state’/’blue state’, etc.)


However, it got me thinking. People are clearly scared of left wing economic policies, there's a fear (an irrational one in my opinion) of bankruptcy, poverty, and whatever else the international capitalist overlords can throw at a country which rejects their policy.

So if they're fearful of the consequences of reformist policies, how can they be turned to policies which would tear down the system? Precedent shows that such moves led to the invasion of sovereign nations and the usurping of democracy when a candidate who wasn't capitalist approved won some of the freest and fairest elections?

First of all, we have to keep our priorities in order; do we want to tear down the system, or create a freer, more equitable society where more people can have access to a better quality of life? It may be entirely possible,. Even likely, that to accomplish this goal one must, as you say; ‘tear down the system.’ However, we need to decide what our priorities are. I think this merits consideration.

Second, people in third world countries might have these concerns, but the fact that we don’t see an abundance of truckers with a high-school education from Arkansas voting for the Socialist Party has nothing to due with a lurking fear of a reenactment of Chile circa 1973. Most likely, they’ve never even heard of Augusto Pinochet. In that case I see two different sets of problems; what you might call social problems, and systemic problems. (Which are interrelated.)The social problems being many working class people in the West (The majority of people in the west.) are not on the page for some reason; they may be demoralized, they may be uneducated, they may be indoctrinated, etc. The second are the systemic problems; in the United States two parties (Essentially, two faces of the business party.) hold a monopoly on power, our political system is very corrupt, which has only become streamlined with Citizens United, etc., etc., etc. We can identify these problems, rank them in the order of importance, and our ability to change them, and construct substantive remedies.

[DaringMehring]

So if they're fearful of the consequences of reformist policies, how can they be turned to policies which would tear down the system? Precedent shows that such moves led to the invasion of sovereign nations and the usurping of democracy when a candidate who wasn't capitalist approved won some of the freest and fairest elections?

Your question comes at the problem of socialist revolution from the wrong perspective.

You do not have to defend reformist politics of any shade in order to argue for a revolutionary break.

Just attack whatever bourgeois politics they believe in. If they are right-bourgeois or left, its easy enough to decimate the lies.

So they won't necessarily start calling for the revolution. That doesn't mean their consciousness hasn't changed.

It's easy to be afraid now. When the masses get in motion, is when the real question of fear will be posed --- when the possibility to throw of the yoke appears as a real counterbalance to fear and pessimism.