Fetishizing the local

[TheOneWhoKnocks]

I've noticed a tendency on the left in both anarchist and socialist circles to focus almost exclusively on local organization in theorizing alternative socities while paying little -- if any -- attention to organization and coordination on a larger scale. While I definitely agree with the importance of local organization, the emergence and inevitabliity of global crises like climate change necessitates organization that extends beyond the local to what we now consider the national and possibly even global scale, as it is only large-scale organization that can coordinate and allocate the scale of resources necessary to deal with them. Take Occupy Sandy, for example. It was able to do a lot of great work when it came to helping individuals, but it certainly was not able to repair infrastructure or construct new infrastructure to defend against future catastrophic storms. What do you think? Is my point off-base?

[Lowtech]

extremely off base. i'm appalled.

no, i'm kidding lol;)... no one should say that what political groups do now doesn't make a difference, they do, and we should appreciate them for it. although, i feel you bring up a very valid point.

we live in a time where the internet can play a vital role in re-organizing society, or at least those who recognize the importance of re-organization, to expel the elites from our economy; our "public utility who's intended purpose is to process resources into usable commodities."

people have been so alienated from the organizational process, skill sets so horribly designed that we need to think in some very outlandish ways to begin to develop a means for people to pool their energies and vitality together to produce an economy without a market, without plutocratic intervention.

collectively, here in forums or anywhere we can, we should formulate protocols to allows individuals who are not physically near each other to participate in some sort of distributed socialistic system.

i think its possible and its a fascinating thing to contemplate.

[JPSartre12]

There are endless possibilities that we could replace bourgeois national and international relations with: federations of workers councils, organized into regional and national tiers, etc.

The point of the decentralization and "local"-ness of it all is that it helps direct, democratic decision-making by the people themselves, something that is not present under bourgeois democratic systems. It also aids in preventing excessive centralization, which may lead back to a bureaucratic state, or even state capitalism.

[Yet_Another_Boring_Marxist]

I've noticed a tendency on the left in both anarchist and socialist circles to focus almost exclusively on local organization in theorizing alternative socities while paying little -- if any -- attention to organization and coordination on a larger scale.

This is provably false.

This is the current Reunified Forth International. Please look how many participants it has.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_International_(Post-Reunification)

Now please list how many of those participants matter.

Don't bother, the answer is zero.

Now please look at this list of Communist Internationals

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Trotskyist_internationals



Unless you have investigated a problem, you will be deprived of the right to speak on it. Isn't that too harsh? Not in the least. When you have not probed into a problem, into the present facts and its past history, and know nothing of its essentials, whatever you say about it will undoubtedly be nonsense. Talking nonsense solves no problems, as everyone knows, so why is it unjust to deprive you of the right to speak? Quite a few comrades always keep their eyes shut and talk nonsense, and for a Communist that is disgraceful. How can a Communist keep his eyes shut and talk nonsense?

It won' t do!

It won't do!

You must investigate!

You must not talk nonsense!

~Mao Zedong

You sir, are basing the premise of your argument on something which is factually incorrect.


The left needs to do the opposite. Interacting with other leftists on the internet is pointless because all leftists (myself included) are stupid, useless human beings whose lives are of no consequence or intrinsic worth, hence why they are the cannon fodder of revolutions. It is the working people that make revolutions, and only the working people. The only way to start the revolution is to win over average working people, and the best place to start is with the one right next door

[TheOneWhoKnocks]

This is provably false.

This is the current Reunified Forth International. Please look how many participants it has.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_International_(Post-Reunification)

Now please list how many of those participants matter.

Don't bother, the answer is zero.

Now please look at this list of Communist Internationals

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Trotskyist_internationals



You sir, are basing the premise of your argument on something which is factually incorrect.


The left needs to do the opposite. Interacting with other leftists on the internet is pointless because all leftists (myself included) are stupid, useless human beings whose lives are of no consequence or intrinsic worth, hence why they are the cannon fodder of revolutions. It is the working people that make revolutions, and only the working people. The only way to start the revolution is to win over average working people, and the best place to start is with the one right next door
I think I may have been misunderstood. I am referring to conceptions of a post-capitalist society, not present-day organizing (which I completely agree needs to be based in local organizing).