www.newsandletters.org
|
|
NEWS & LETTERS, November 2004Youth
Conference gives Marxism bad name
by Joshua Skolnik Several hundred participants, mostly college youth,
attended what was called the Northeast Socialist Conference on Oct. 23 in New
York. It was in fact a regional conference of the International Socialist
Organization (ISO), one of the largest socialist groups in the U.S., followers
of Tony Cliff. In the sessions, the ISO speakers put forth mostly
bland, abstract and simplistic concepts of socialism, while other members
repeating the party line dominated discussion. Yet in private conversations, a
number of youth showed a lot of interest in Marx and in theory. Their interest
was a welcome contrast to our experiences at some recent youth activist events
here, at which attendees exhibited no interest in Marx and opposition to any
role for theory in revolutionary process. At the ISO conference, people who came
to the N&L literature table wanted to talk about political economy and, in
particular, value theory, issues that go to the heart of creating a
non-capitalist society. This interest was not reflected in the conference
agenda, however, which served to separate theory from activism. UNDERCURRENT OF EXPLORING While ideas about alternatives to capitalism were not on
the agenda of conference sessions, two sessions I attended did deal with the
possibility of socialism. They were entitled "Is Revolution Possible in the
U.S.?" and "Is Human Nature a Barrier to Socialism?" Although the
former dealt primarily with the current political conjuncture and the
difficulties of political organizing and combating ideology in quiescent times,
the latter elicited from the audience some serious questions concerning problems
that will no doubt arise in a revolutionary situation. One man wondered: if, in a new society, we are to
develop our potential to the fullest, who will do the necessary work that no one
wants to do? One woman responded that we would need to share that unpleasant
work, so that everyone could be given the opportunity to develop her talents and
interests. Another woman said that capitalism, rather than being an expression
of some eternal human nature, denies our nature, referring to its regime of
forced labor that stunts human development. Someone else wanted to know if a repressive regime would
be necessary to ensure that capitalists don’t reassert themselves. There was
no mention, however, of the possibility of a counter-revolution arising from
within the revolution--which happened throughout the 20th century--nor was there
discussion of the specificity of value production and how to abolish it from the
outset of a new society. The hard theoretic labor needed to work out these and
other questions was nowhere on the ISO’s agenda, while it is central to News
and Letters Committees’ "Perspectives": "To leave ideas to the
realm of ‘theory’ and organization to that of ‘practice’ robs us of the
ability to comprehensively respond to the question of whether there is an
alternative to capitalism and what has called itself ‘socialism’" (see
July N&L). THEORY AND PRACTICE DIVORCED The conference revealed just how deeply-held is this
assumption that theory and practice dwell in separate realms, an idea that
permeates the Left as well as bourgeois society. That is, the realms of ideas
and actions do not overlap, let alone influence each other. The political
practice of the ISO appears totally divorced from the development of ideas
needed for today’s mass movements to progress. Thus, their discussions of
politics remained at best flat and uninspiring. The ISO’s worst political position, due to the dire
situation Iraqis face today, besieged both by the occupation and the violence it
provokes, is its uncritical support for an undifferentiated Iraqi
"resistance," which was a topic in a number of sessions. It is
imperative that we make concrete our determination to support the forces of
revolution on the ground in Iraq, not some abstract "right of
resistance"--the ISO’s cover for its uncritical support for those
fighting the U.S. militarily, irrespective of the concrete struggles of workers
and women AGAINST the religious forces who largely make up this resistance. Such
positions leave the American anti-war movement in a state of disarray, isolated
from people-to-people international solidarity, and without any idea of what it
is FOR. There was no sense that the dialogue created between
struggles that comes from building international solidarity with liberatory
movements in places like Iraq is necessary if all our respective struggles for
an alternative to the existing order are to be victorious. Such abstract
conceptions, which pervade most of their political positions, betray an attitude
of indifference to the concrete problems of revolution, including the question
of what happens after the revolution. Toward building the American movement, the ISO displays
an attitude of organizing as usual, only more of it. Typical of this
conventional left wisdom was the keynote speaker, historian Howard Zinn, who,
when asked what we should do, told the audience to keep on doing what they’ve
been doing, and eventually things will go our way. It should be clear by now that past efforts have shown themselves unable to overcome the obstacles our movements continuously confront; that we need a fundamental rethinking of our ideas and practices. A solution needs to be worked out organizationally but not without recognizing the integrality of dialectical philosophy for the resolution of these recurring problems in theory and practice. |
|
Home l News & Letters Newspaper l Back issues l News and Letters Committees l Dialogues l Raya Dunayevskaya l Contact us l Search Published by News and Letters Committees |
