"A New Dawn for the US Left" (Or, Example #4,956 Why I Hate Liberals)

[Terminator X]

http://www.truth-out.org/new-dawn-us-left/1309898636


Prospects for the left in the United States (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/usa) are far better than they seem to most observers across the political spectrum (excepting those who fantasize imminent revolutionary uprisings spearheaded by 79-year-old sociology professors (http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/frances-fox-piven)).


A resurgent US left can take from the Tea Party movement those of its supporters who can identify business and the rich as adversaries, who harbour anti-capitalist impulses. The political terrain in the United States has shifted and the US left now has major opportunities.

This is what passes for the "left" in the US - Mr. Wolff wants "change" without revolution (and speaks of "opportunities" for the left - which are what, exactly?), while getting in passive-aggressive shots at Noam Chomsky (who has more knowledge of leftist politics in his pinky finger than Wolff does in his entire body) and all but fellating the Tea Partiers. And people wonder why actual leftists despise "liberals" even more than conservatives?

Again, this is an example of a liberal identifying the problem (capitalism) but stopping short of calling for revolution, or removal of the system (and mocking leftists who do so).

[danyboy27]

I can understand why he is doing that, imagine how much time his career would last if he would say something like ''lets throw them out right fucking now!"''

You just cant say that, beccause if you do you wont get published or people wont take you seriously.

That why he and other will do everything they can to dodge the issue.

Hell, i am not a teacher and if i would say to my collegues, who are workers who hate their bosses, what i really think should be done, chances are i would lose my job.

Its fucking hard to be a leftist in this world, its already amazing that peoples like wolff and harvey are still widely known and still have their jobs.

[GPDP]

I can understand why he is doing that, imagine how much time his career would last if he would say something like ''lets throw them out right fucking now!"''

You just cant say that, beccause if you do you wont get published or people wont take you seriously.

That why he and other will do everything they can to dodge the issue.

Hell, i am not a teacher and if i would say to my collegues, who are workers who hate their bosses, what i really think should be done, chances are i would lose my job.

Its fucking hard to be a leftist in this world, its already amazing that peoples like wolff and harvey are still widely known and still have their jobs.

Ok, there's a difference between being vague about your socialism (saying we need "progress" and "the mega-rich" are the obstacle or something like that), and being downright anti-socialist, which is what this guy was sounding like. You can downplay your socialist credentials and water down your message to keep your job without being a dishonest dick and taking jabs at the idea of revolution and those who propose it.

[syndicat]

rick wolff isn't a liberal. he's a Marxist who advocates market socialism. i'm not saying i agree in any respect with what he is saying here. i think trying to recruit tea party people is absurd. his remarks are i suppose more of a sign of the desperation of some people.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

In short, the US left is working its way to a comprehensive alternative programme to exit the crisis, one taxing the corporations and the richest 5%...

:rolleyes:

"Expropriate (some taxes from) the expropriators!"

[Lynx]

He didn't exactly say that Obama could win over the Tea Party and the next election, did he? Or did he?

[GPDP]

rick wolff isn't a liberal. he's a Marxist who advocates market socialism. i'm not saying i agree in any respect with what he is saying here. i think trying to recruit tea party people is absurd. his remarks are i suppose more of a sign of the desperation of some people.

The part about market socialism aside, he's got to be delusional if he thinks he can be a Marxist and get away with denouncing revolution. He can call himself the reincarnation of Marx for all I care - his talk here coincides him with the walk of a social-democrat, not a revolutionary socialist.

[Jose Gracchus]

Oh look. Another academic 'Marxist' calling for some kind of tired reboot of Keynesianism. Where is the class struggle politics in that passage, because I fail to see it. It could easily have been written by a Howard Dean/Dennis Kucinich-ite.

The idea there's some kind of "grassroots" which can be saved from the Tea Party is absurd. They constantly have all kinds of contradictions and absurdities wrapped up in there, and there's no way its going to be redirected in a way that takes the state away from the plutocracy. Absurd incoherent politics and program (but always ending up on the side of capital) is an age-old canard of populist right-wing elements/semi-fascists.

[Obs]

he's a Marxist who advocates market socialism.

A what now?

[Luís Henrique]

This is what passes for the "left" in the US - Mr. Wolff wants "change" without revolution (and speaks of "opportunities" for the left - which are what, exactly?)

"Left" and "right" tend to be used around as relative terms; in a country that hasn't historically had nothing even similar to a socialdemocratic party, bourgeois democrats are going to be labeled "leftists" in opposition to bourgeois authoritarians and conservatives. It is rather a problem of the American society than a problem of this individual.


while getting in passive-aggressive shots at Noam Chomsky (who has more knowledge of leftist politics in his pinky finger than Wolff does in his entire body)

Bickering with other leftists is quite common among us (indeed, it looks very much like what you are doing). And I can see no mentions to Chomsky on the link you provided.


and all but fellating the Tea Partiers.

He is not doing that. He is saying that, once the Tea Party's delusions about shrinking the State break against the bourgeoisie's determination to keep in place a functioning, strong State to foster and direct private business and to repress dissent, its members will be available for other experiences in politics. He may well be wrong, but he is not talking about tailing the TP.


And people wonder why actual leftists despise "liberals" even more than conservatives?

We don't "despise" liberals, we think they are on the other side of the divide between labour and capital.


Again, this is an example of a liberal identifying the problem (capitalism)

If he identifies the problem as capitalism, then he certainly is not a liberal. Liberals firmly believe capitalism is the solution, not the problem.


but stopping short of calling for revolution, or removal of the system (and mocking leftists who do so).

Why should he call for a revolution, if there is absolutely no way that a revolution would happen in the foreseeable future? We call for a revolution when we can actually make one, not when we want to look over-radical. And again I don't see him mocking anyone there.

Luís Henrique

[blake 3:17]

I don't think the piece is that bad. A Left reformist movement with any degree of popularity in the US would be a good thing. Some of the Right populists are on to something and I think it unfortunate if the radical and revolutionary Left discounts it.

[blake 3:17]

The idea there's some kind of "grassroots" which can be saved from the Tea Party is absurd.

You sure on that?