what can i do?

[shorelinetrance]

Basically, , lately i've become more an more mad and the injustices that happen everyday to millions of people everyday, but i really really want to do something about it, but as a 16 year old kid, theres not much i can do.

I'm honestly sitting here shaking right now, i can't put my thoughts of how i feel into this post.

This is a pretty basic post, but i don't really know what else to say, i'm just sick of everything thats wrong, and i wanna do something to help.

I know there is alot wrong with this world, but as long as i'm alive i want to at least help change it for the better.

What can i do?


damn//edit i lurk but i never post haha

[Libber]

Possibly the most important thing you can do right now is to educate yourself in the techniques of being a covert change agent.

Too many lefties, especially young intelligent ones, it seems, have no earthly idea about how to create change. What they mostly create is resistance, because they read Marx and get all fired up with religious fervor (and it really is religious, even though secular). So they run right out and start preaching marxism at people, which doesn't work. And after it doesn't work enough times, they give up and spend their time talking about theory with other burnt-out marxists instead of creating change.

I'd suggest starting with the late Saul Alinsky's Reveille for Radicals and Rules for Radicals. Don't just skim them. They're deceptive, because you think you get everything they have to offer the first time through. But if you read them carefully, you'll continue to get new insights every time you re-read them. Notice that he didn't claim any political identity except "radical", and he didn't care about theory, only about what works in real life.

I hope that's helpful.

[Not entirely illiterate]

While an ardrous zeal for a cause can be good to a certain extent, it is generally inefficient, especially in a state prior to revolution.

I have spoken with many young revolutionaries even prior to my advent here to RevLeft, and I've always based my advice on an excerpt from Sun Zi's "The Art of War" (孫子兵法 (http://www.yellowbridge.com/onlinelit/artofwar.html)), which states:

Sun Zi Bing Fa, chapter 3

If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.

Now, one may wonder, what exactly am I implying with this? Well, preparing an army to conquer a neighboring country isn't all too different from preparing the proletarianate to rise against their self-appointed masters. We must transform the worker into a warrior. Now, unfortunately, it is the bourgeois that are holding the weapons (obviously, that's the only thing keeping them alive), but there is more to a warrior than to bear arms.

In ancient times, being a warrior was more than an occupation; it encompassed every aspect of their lives. While I realise this is impossible since the workers are just that, workers. However, I suggest that the spare-time of the revolutionary should always be silent preparation for war. Learn to master your own body, sharpen your senses and your strength, turn yourself and your comrades into deadly weapons in their own right.

How is this done? There are many ways, and every path for self-mastery is individual. Educate yourself, develop an interest in the arts, learn to expand your thoughts. Learn to meditate (though meditation, you can effectively minimise the need for sleep, allowing you to have more free time). Practice martial arts. Internal arts like Taijiquan, Hatha-Yoga and Qigong is a good start; you can easily do it on your own and you need no equipment. Once you've built a good standard physique, change into more power-oriented styles. Here, the variety is even larger. Contemplate on your own body, which style suits it best? I recommend styles like Bujinkan Budo Taijutsu, Krav Maga, Muay-Thai or Sambo, since they are focused on effective offensive or defensive power, where you experience quick results and street-smarts.

Although I know it is not popular among many, I also recommend that unhealthy habits should be discarded; consumption of alcohol, tobacco or other drugs damage your body, clouds your judgement and drains what little money you have from your pocket into corporate ones (or even worse, the black market). Don't visit pubs; gather your friends and practice physical exercises together, exchange intellectual ideas. Eat healthy food. Make yourself as independent as possible from corporate products; if you can, grow your own food.

Make note that all of the above practices are perfectly legal, and thus, you should be safe from any interference by any reactionary powers.

[Johann]

Not sure i agree there illiterate. I think that if you do things like that you'll end up with a small group of wackos. I mean, its fair enough too learn a couple of simple moves for self defence but why have it consume your life entirely.


also recommend that unhealthy habits should be discarded; consumption of alcohol, tobacco or other drugs damage your body

:o We don't want to come across as a bunch of humourless bastards.

shorelinetrance:

I know how you feel, its especially frustrating when no one else you know gives a damn. The important thing is, like Libber said, not to burn out and don't get discouraged.

Personally i don't think that its especially important to be 'active' at this stage but more to know what your talking about and being able to argue your case.

[Not entirely illiterate]

Not sure i agree there illiterate. I think that if you do things like that you'll end up with a small group of wackos.

Should I interpret this as dedication only being something for madmen and loonies? Elite athletes all live roughly the lifestyle that I proposed, would you consider them "a small group of wackos"? Certainly you agree with me when I say that the revolution is far more important a goal than to push a world record in jumping? Should it not be awarded at least as much dedication then, if not more?


I mean, its fair enough too learn a couple of simple moves for self defence but why have it consume your life entirely.


You don't have to dedicate your life entirely. It isn't arduous training in itself I am proposing, it is the fruits of this type of practice. You don't have to master a martial art, just be proficient in it. The typical martial artist today practices for fun or for fitness, perhaps once or twice a week. At such a pace, developing any real skill will take a long time.


We don't want to come across as a bunch of humourless bastards.

If I'd have to choose between a bunch of humourless bastards that are dedicated and well-trained or a merry band of cheerful, but sloppy and hedonistic blokes as my brothers in arms for the oncoming revolution... can you guess which ones I'd pick?

Besides, whoever told you that you cannot have fun without drugs was either poorly mislead (perhaps by unnecessary needs, conveyed by liquor and tobacco companies) or just a plain bloody liar.

[redcannon]

shorline:

For the time being, focus on educating yourself. I'm in the same boat you're in. I can't tell you the amount of times I've been debating cappies only to find out that they don't know what I'm talking about. Especially at your age education is important. In the School system, its important to be able to see through the bullshit, and I mean all of the bullshit.

The time will come when physical action will be needed, but right now just fill your mind with whatever you can absorb. Even though it doesn't seem like you're doing anything, just posting on this forum is already turning the tides.

[shorelinetrance]

But i don't see how sitting on a computer reading is gonna change things...

I mean i understand the need to educate oursels but sitting on our asses definitely isn't changing anything.

[Janus]

Check out the sticky in this forum:

Beginners's guide to getting active (http://www.revleft.com/index.php?showtopic=61354)

[shorelinetrance]

Originally posted by [email protected] 07, 2007 07:53 pm
Check out the sticky in this forum:

Beginners's guide to getting active (http://www.revleft.com/index.php?showtopic=61354)
i have no idea how i missed that.

god damn.

[Forward Union]

just posting on this forum is already turning the tides.

No it´s not.


Check out the sticky in this forum:

Yes, essentially you are going to want to find or set up a local group.

One thing I will add is that im currently in Chiapas Mexico at the moment and will only have very limited internet access, until tuesday, when I will be in Zapatista territory, and consiquently uncontactable until august. So although I promised to do what I can to help anyone set up a branch or whatever, that´s going to have to be a suspended promise. Incidently, if you want any advice on getting to the Zapatista communities to do volonteer work, let me know.

Sorry, and good luck.

[Libber]

Originally posted by [email protected] 07, 2007 07:31 pm
But i don't see how sitting on a computer reading is gonna change things...

I mean i understand the need to educate oursels but sitting on our asses definitely isn't changing anything.
A key concept is that the best revolution is the one that doesn't look or sound like a revolution, and that therefore meets with no resistance.

Anybody can play Bader-Meinhof or SLA, get a few people together, get some guns, yell "down with the corrupt system!" and start shooting people. But that's not a revolution, that's a few people with guns who are soon going to be bodies in the morgue with "criminal" on their toe-tags.

The real revolution starts when somebody who's never questioned the status quo frowns and says slowly "...yeah, why th'hell are things always so screwed up?"

So if you have good sense, you're going to use the time to train up -- which is changing something: yourself.

[shorelinetrance]

Originally posted by Libber+July 07, 2007 11:47 pm--> (Libber @ July 07, 2007 11:47 pm)
[email protected] 07, 2007 07:31 pm
But i don't see how sitting on a computer reading is gonna change things...

I mean i understand the need to educate oursels but sitting on our asses definitely isn't changing anything.
A key concept is that the best revolution is the one that doesn't look or sound like a revolution, and that therefore meets with no resistance.

Anybody can play Bader-Meinhof or SLA, get a few people together, get some guns, yell "down with the corrupt system!" and start shooting people. But that's not a revolution, that's a few people with guns who are soon going to be bodies in the morgue with "criminal" on their toe-tags.

The real revolution starts when somebody who's never questioned the status quo frowns and says slowly "...yeah, why th'hell are things always so screwed up?"

So if you have good sense, you're going to use the time to train up -- which is changing something: yourself. [/b]
Even if i change myself, that isn't changing the world, and thats what i feel we should be doing.

It just feels hopeless now, i was reading about that thing is oaxoco(rofl i can't spell) mexico, and they just got murdered, what did they gain by doing that, that guy is still in power.

At the same time i want to change things, but at the same time it feels hopeless.

[RedJacobin]

I think this is an important article whether you're just coming into political life or have been at it for a while. It gets at some of the issues that are being discussed: whether changing the world, and doing it in a way that won't be co-opted, requires thinking, reading, and studying or whether one can "just do it" as Nike (and American pragmatism) says.

Left Anti-Intellectualism and its Discontents (http://www.lipmagazine.org/articles/featfeatherstone_activistism.shtml)

[which doctor]

Don't feel like you have to sacrifice anything to save some poor, oppressed mass in some far off distant country. Don't feel bad you aren't doing more for the "movement." Just be yourself, raise awareness amongst the people around you. Be subversive. Live dangerously.

[Not entirely illiterate]

As much as you cannot love someone else before learning to loving yourself, you cannot conquer someone without first conquering yourself. It is pointless planning to build a grandiose cathedral without first having having gathered mortar and stones, and preparing the craftsmen.

Having said that, there is no excuse for slacking, either. Why not try to do something little every day, even if only for the sake of keeping a good spirit?

[Labor Shall Rule]

Well shit, get active! I am 16, but I am involved in many actions. I have done local work in soup kitchens and food drives, distributed several flyers that I drew up myself on the issue of migrant workers, have been involved in several demonstrations against various fascist groups that show their rotten face across Pennsylvania, and even had the opportunity to be a voice at an anti-war teach-in at a local college. I don't understand what is stopping you.

[Libber]

Originally posted by [email protected] 08, 2007 01:07 am
I think this is an important article whether you're just coming into political life or have been at it for a while. It gets at some of the issues that are being discussed: whether changing the world, and doing it in a way that won't be co-opted, requires thinking, reading, and studying or whether one can "just do it" as Nike (and American pragmatism) says.
I agree that it's an article well worth SLT's time to read and think about.

My only caution would be not to swallow it whole, as gospel. That's because, while I don't know the other 2 authors, Doug Henwood is what I think of as a "classic" academic marxist, content to talk endlessly.

He also disparages Saul Alinsky, but I was never able to pin him down about his reasons (if he has reasons). The closest I could get seemed to be that, since Alinsky didn't transform the whole country, the changes he did achieve were worthless. Which was an objection I found a little breathtaking, given that Doug himself doesn't seem to have ever done anything at all except talk, publish a newsletter, and hobnob with the ruling class.

[Johann]

Should I interpret this as dedication only being something for madmen and loonies?

While i agree revolution is more important than jumping, I dont think i would be alone in thinking it was a bit weird that these people were trying to turn themselves into deadly weapons. Not everyone is willing to drop everything and dedicate themselves to the revolution, by all means do that if you want just so long as no one starts getting all more-proletarian-than-thou on the 'part time' revolutionaries.


You don't have to dedicate your life entirely. It isn't arduous training in itself I am proposing, it is the fruits of this type of practice.

Sorry if i misunderstood you there i just got that impression from where you said that we should spend our time in preparation for war.

What is it they say about a stiletto in hand being worth five years of karate training? Either way your stiletto isn't going to be much good if your fighting someone with a gun. You yourself admit it will take a long time to get any real skill so why bother doing anything more than learn a couple of self defence moves that require little practice but might stop you getting your ass kicked in a fight?


If I'd have to choose between a bunch of humourless bastards that are dedicated and well-trained or a merry band of cheerful, but sloppy and hedonistic blokes as my brothers in arms for the oncoming revolution... can you guess which ones I'd pick?

You may be more comfortable with that but what about the rest of the world, i doubt they would be willing to give up what comforts they have for a revolution that may or may not come in their lifetimes.

It is much more important to argue coherently about why our ideas are better than anyone else's, much more effective to bring people around to our way of thinking than it is to crush those we disagree with.



^ it was better first time i wrote it but my internet was playing up and i lost it. so it might seem a bit rushed or confused.

[RedJacobin]

Originally posted by [email protected] 08, 2007 11:08 am
He also disparages Saul Alinsky, but I was never able to pin him down about his reasons (if he has reasons). The closest I could get seemed to be that, since Alinsky didn't transform the whole country, the changes he did achieve were worthless. Which was an objection I found a little breathtaking, given that Doug himself doesn't seem to have ever done anything at all except talk, publish a newsletter, and hobnob with the ruling class.
I don't know about Henwood (whose politics I agree are inadequate), but I think Alinsky's work is an embodiment of the anti-intellectualism that's criticized in the article. Alinsky belittled theory. He was wrong. Without theory, the most militant mass movements will be co-opted. Without theory, the best that radicals can do is fight for reforms while leaving the system unchanged. Also, there's a big difference between Alinsky's mistaken view that reformist organizations can achieve "power" in any meaningful sense of the word and the revolutionary view that without state power, all is illusion.

[Libber]

Originally posted by [email protected] 08, 2007 02:55 pm
Without theory, the most militant mass movements will be co-opted. Without theory, the best that radicals can do is fight for reforms while leaving the system unchanged.

Also, there's a big difference between Alinsky's mistaken view that reformist organizations can achieve "power" in any meaningful sense of the word and the revolutionary view that without state power, all is illusion.
hmmm...I'm not sure I agree, but that might be because I don't understand. Can you say more?

I'm of the school that says our only real theories are those revealed by our practice. If we don't do it, we don't believe it no matter what we say. And any change is real, no matter how small or short-lived, because it weakens the barrier against future change.

[Wanted Man]

A good start: listen to LU (Urban Spirit), he's one of the few people here who knows what he's talking about. Be sure to read that damn sticky, too.

Isn't there any kind of movement active around where you live?

[shorelinetrance]

Originally posted by Dick [email protected] 08, 2007 04:01 pm
A good start: listen to LU (Urban Spirit), he's one of the few people here who knows what he's talking about. Be sure to read that damn sticky, too.

Isn't there any kind of movement active around where you live?
nope =(

[RedJacobin]

Originally posted by Libber+July 08, 2007 03:22 pm--> (Libber @ July 08, 2007 03:22 pm)
[email protected] 08, 2007 02:55 pm
Without theory, the most militant mass movements will be co-opted. Without theory, the best that radicals can do is fight for reforms while leaving the system unchanged.

Also, there's a big difference between Alinsky's mistaken view that reformist organizations can achieve "power" in any meaningful sense of the word and the revolutionary view that without state power, all is illusion.
hmmm...I'm not sure I agree, but that might be because I don't understand. Can you say more?

I'm of the school that says our only real theories are those revealed by our practice. If we don't do it, we don't believe it no matter what we say. And any change is real, no matter how small or short-lived, because it weakens the barrier against future change. [/b]
I mean in Rules for Radicals when Alinsky wrote “no ideology should be more specific than that of America’s founding fathers: ‘For the general welfare’” and argues for relativism and against truth, he was advocating a worldview that won’t lead to anything better than the current system. Any movement that puts those restrictions on thinking (dogmatism in the name of opposition to dogma) is trapped within the limits of this system, even if it fights militantly against specific injustices.

When Marx said that the ruling ideas of every age are the ideas of the ruling class, I think he meant not only that the ruling class controls the media, but also that the ideas arising spontaneously from everyday lived experience ultimately confirm and legitimate the existing social relations. By and large, the theories revealed by our practice are bourgeois theories.

Revolutionary theory (Marxism) has to come from outside the day-to-day struggles to survive and to resist specific forms of oppression. Marxist theory definitely corresponds to social practice in the broadest sense, in that there exists a class with nothing to lose but its chains and is capable of leading a revolution to get to a world beyond all exploitation and oppression, but I don’t think it’s directly revealed through the practice of individual workers or activists. Marxism is a science and has to be studied like other sciences.

[redcannon]

Just to clear something up: my first post wasn't implying that getting educated was the only thing you could do, just one of the more important things, IMO.

That said, it is a good sticky.

[Libber]

Originally posted by [email protected] 08, 2007 04:32 pm
I mean in Rules for Radicals when Alinsky wrote “no ideology should be more specific than that of America’s founding fathers: ‘For the general welfare’” and argues for relativism and against truth, he was advocating a worldview that won’t lead to anything better than the current system. Any movement that puts those restrictions on thinking (dogmatism in the name of opposition to dogma) is trapped within the limits of this system, even if it fights militantly against specific injustices.

When Marx said that the ruling ideas of every age are the ideas of the ruling class, I think he meant not only that the ruling class controls the media, but also that the ideas arising spontaneously from everyday lived experience ultimately confirm and legitimate the existing social relations. By and large, the theories revealed by our practice are bourgeois theories.

Revolutionary theory (Marxism) has to come from outside the day-to-day struggles to survive and to resist specific forms of oppression. Marxist theory definitely corresponds to social practice in the broadest sense, in that there exists a class with nothing to lose but its chains and is capable of leading a revolution to get to a world beyond all exploitation and oppression, but I don’t think it’s directly revealed through the practice of individual workers or activists. Marxism is a science and has to be studied like other sciences.
Thanks for taking the time to explain; it helped.

I don't think your interpretation can be correct that studying (e.g.) Marx's theories is the only way not to have banal ideas. If it were correct, then Marx himself could never have developed a non-banal theory.

The historical record is replete, I believe, with evidence that people can draw lessons from their experience and go beyond the conventions demanded by the ruling class. The subversive couplet "When Adam dug and Eve spun / Who was then the nobleman?" pre-dates 19th c. revolutionary thinking by 500 years. It was widespread in England in the 1300s. And people had no trouble grasping the fact that they were getting screwed when, after the Black Death wiped out a third of the population, the king ordered that the surviving laborers must work for the same money they'd received before the plague. Nobody needed special theoreticians to explain to them why that was crooked as hell, or that there's something bad crazy about the idea that ten should toil so that one can live in luxury. They figured it out for themselves, without the benefit of received theory or even schooling.

Chomsky picked up a phrase from the Landless Workers Movement in Brasil that he likes, and I'm sure Alinsky would have liked, too: "expanding the floor of the cage". The idea being that it's self-destructive to construe the goal as an all-or-nothing proposition, where nothing less than a socialist paradise is worthwhile. In real life, even making the cage bigger and less restrictive is good. Even if it turns out not to be an intermediate step, but the sum total of what we can do, it's still good. Because we each only have one life, and we can't defer living it. Whatever we've got at any moment in time, that's what we live and work with. So it really is all relative, and if we're hungry a big bowl of soup is better than a small bowl. It might not fully satisfy, but we're better-off having it than not having it.

That's how it looks to me, anyway.

[Libber]

Originally posted by [email protected] 08, 2007 04:32 pm
I mean in Rules for Radicals when Alinsky wrote “no ideology should be more specific than that of America’s founding fathers: ‘For the general welfare’” and argues for relativism and against truth, he was advocating a worldview that won’t lead to anything better than the current system. Any movement that puts those restrictions on thinking (dogmatism in the name of opposition to dogma) is trapped within the limits of this system, even if it fights militantly against specific injustices.
(I forgot to respond to this)

Note the reason he gives for saying that there should be no ideology more specific than "the general welfare". If you have a more completely-defined goal, and a big theoretical framework supporting it, you can't easily change direction in response to changes in reality. You're locked in. If it's a small goal, you've nowhere to go once you've achieved it. If it's a big goal, you risk people burning out and giving up before you even come close.

But if you have a non-specific goal ("life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" is a good example--note that "property" was in the draft, but removed as being too specific) then every achievement can be celebrated as a tiny victory, but the road ahead is never closed.

If our goal is "a better life for everyone", then we have a number of ways we can get there and many possible stages that can be celebrated along the road. If it's "dictatorship of the proletariat", then we're screwed if it looks like the avatars of "the proletariat" are going to be crooked and self-serving.

Once we've got everyone invested in a specific goal, it becomes very difficult to explain why we're not going there any more. That's what Orwell's doublethink was all about - fascists are abominable but we have a non-aggression pact with fascists. It was either very crooked or very stupid or both. It revealed a big disconnect between theory and practice, and a lot of decent commies bailed when they got in touch with that.

[Not entirely illiterate]

While i agree revolution is more important than jumping, I dont think i would be alone in thinking it was a bit weird that these people were trying to turn themselves into deadly weapons. Not everyone is willing to drop everything and dedicate themselves to the revolution, by all means do that if you want just so long as no one starts getting all more-proletarian-than-thou on the 'part time' revolutionaries.

I suppose that the more proletarian you are, the less free time you have available on your hands, so the most "true" proletarian (a ridiculous notion, I know) wouldn't really have time for anything at all except struggling to survive.

For those that do have time, however, I don't see the point in not preparing yourself except a lack of dedication. Remember that all aspects of your life will most certainly improve if you develop a strong and healthy physique and an expansive mind, so in that aspect it's hardly a sacrifice at all.


What is it they say about a stiletto in hand being worth five years of karate training?

I wouldn't encourage anyone to carry about a knife. First of all, it's illegal, and using it will put you into a lot of trouble that just isn't worth the fuss. Second, just carrying around a weapon doesn't give you the advantages of being experienced, not falling into fear, being able to judge an opponent and adapt yourself to the situation. You really cannot do anything but just stand there and swing. You're totally dependent on the weapon, and if you lose it (disarming an inexperienced knife-fighter is easier than you think, you're helpless. You won't know when not to fight either, which is very important; just flipping out a switchblade employs lethal force, which is rarely a desirable thing but you don't really have any option (this is probably the cause of so many unnecessary gun-related deaths, especially in the US). Anyone can hammer in a nail if they have the tools, but you cannot make much out of it unless you know what you're doing. A knife is just that, a tool.

Hence the saying, "What is the steel compared to the hand wielding it?"


Either way your stiletto isn't going to be much good if your fighting someone with a gun. You yourself admit it will take a long time to get any real skill so why bother doing anything more than learn a couple of self defence moves that require little practice but might stop you getting your ass kicked in a fight?

I don't advocate martial practices simply because it can help you in a fight. It will improve your health, making you stronger and more resilient to all ill things in life. It will improve the quality of your life. Furthermore, it will equip you with a mind-set for war; remaining calm and focused in all situations, the dedication to overcome difficult odds, the willpower to survive and endure. All revolutionaries should, at least to some degree (the more, the better), be prepared for just that; war. Untrained soldiers are useless.


You may be more comfortable with that but what about the rest of the world, i doubt they would be willing to give up what comforts they have for a revolution that may or may not come in their lifetimes.

That is a poor excuse. "The revolution won't happen in my lifetime, there's no reason to prepare", such a mindset will do little but postpone action and possibly even lose an opportunity. If you're not willing to give up some comfort for a worthy cause, then I wonder what kind of a revolutionary you are.


It is much more important to argue coherently about why our ideas are better than anyone else's, much more effective to bring people around to our way of thinking than it is to crush those we disagree with.

While I do advocate this also, the reason why I consider myself a revolutionary and not a reformist is because I do not believe that this will lead to the change we desire. No matter if you convince every single member of the lower classes, if those that hold power refuse to let go of it (and rest assured they won't), a conflict is inevitable. And if the proletariat isn't prepared, or even willing, to put up a fight, we've already lost.

[notbourgeois]

Hello, everyone. I'm new here. I have the same problem as shorelinetrance, in that I'm extremely isolated because no one around me is a bit interested in thinking about the nature of reality, the relations of production, a better world, etc. But that is the nature of capitalism, to keep us isolated, atomized, and dreaming.
I suppose that if we're dreaming of subverting the system instead of just dreaming about its alleged virtues or believeing in its permanance , we have achieved a large victory already.
Just "doing something" is not enough, but I have been learning and thinking for many years now and I'd certainly like to have a chance to act for a change!