Thanks to Beornn for a really thought -provoking article, and to Grace for bringing it to our attention.
It's a great exercise to engage intellectually with abstract concepts such as socialism, equality, community, etc, but thinking and imagining what would be like if they configured our lives is actually what needs to be communicated. It would also enthuse those who have the task of communicating these ideas as well.
That's exactly it. It's what I spend all my time thinking about, and as a teacher I know it's the only thing that really works to get people learning, inspired, and changing their lives.
A very thought-provoking piece! This is where education is so important, so that people have the tools (the political abstraction) to understand their current conditions and that these conditions can be changed. It is, as you point out, about linking the material condition with the abstraction and how the material condition can be changed. That's political hope.
It articulates superbly so much of what I’ve been feeling about the left for a while now. This is essentially what Gramsci was saying nearly 100 years ago.
Thank you for those thoughts. Thats actually what everything is about. And if we adress and rise questions about our vision of a good life, suddenly there are less walls between people on the whole political scale.
I think you’re genuinely onto something very important. The ‘de-abstraction’ of narrative has the potential to counter the normalisation abstraction camouflages. It is much more effective storytelling.
U.S. Political Parties - Democratic, Republican, Democratic Socialist, Green, Libertarian, etcetera interact with their membership the way professional sports teams manage their fan base. As long as the team, i.e., the Party, is winning (in power), regardless of terrible coaching, poorly performing athletes, or greedy ownership, the fan base will stay optimistic. If the Party is losing, the coaching staff, players, management, and owners are all subject to criticism, player trades, and fan base pessimism; but generally, very few fans stop supporting the Party. Independent voters continue to have a soft spot for their home team, but generally gain more satisfaction from fantasy candidate political engagement. The selection of players (candidates) from different parties whom the fantasy player expects will do well as an individual contributor, with less consideration of how that fantasy player's team (Party) performs. I say all of this, because, until Party Politics is totally and completely separated from PACS, Corporate funding, and pay-to-play inter-dependencies, I don't believe it will matter, here in the U.S., whether the Left, Right, or Center Parties disambiguate their "isms" from their platform promises. We must eliminate all private campaign funding.
That's an interesting way of replying that has much to tell us about party institutions. I agree that institutions shape more than political labels alone. My argument is that this applies beyond elections too. The question isn't only which party wins, but how society organises what people become capable of doing together in everyday life. This conditions much more than one institution.
".....how society organises what people become capable of doing together in everyday life. This conditions much more than one institution."
But the "institution" of political parties, here in the U.S., is an apex predator that has considerable impact on how U.S. society organizes. (I need to learn more about Australia's system).
I think there are some important models of what is possible outside party organisation in the US. BLM and Black Panthers (before they were repressed) provided some. And particularly the latter sought to reorganise people's lives.
You need to think more about how the state functions. There's a deeper analysis because parties mediate state functions that either major party in the US support and reinforce despite their differences. The Black Panthers weren't threatening because they supported one party over anothe. They were threatening because they were building institutions that reorganised everyday life, such as free breakfasts, health clinics, political education, community self-defence. The response came from state institutions that existed across party administrations. That's why I'm interested in how society organises people's social powers, not just how a party temporarily governs.
Just to clarify terms, when you use the term "state" small s, are you referring to Australia's six states and the 50 U.S. States. Or do you mean the State (capital S) as in the National Government. Clearly the U.S. National Government (The State) with the current U.S. party in power shows no mediation.
And, what happened to those Black Panther Party "institutions," despite support from a number of black congressional members? Their "institutions" were performative, not reorganizing. They were opportunities to demonstrate that black power could be an effective method of gaining a level of fear-driven respect in response to Police brutality.
Every democracy is a fight to see who shapes the future, the powerful few or the many, who decides what and whom government is for. Democracy is not a side issue it’s about who benefits and who pays, whether we build schools or prisons, public healthcare and education, or privatize everything. Breaking Free of Neoliberalism in Trump Times: How Canada can strengthen our sovereignty and address the American challenge, inequality and the climate crisis https://a.co/d/0cLbP1T9
We would own more things together, we would stop viewing unemployment and recession as the solution to the affordability crisis. We would end homelessness, and we would stop the A.I. boosterism.
Thanks to Beornn for a really thought -provoking article, and to Grace for bringing it to our attention.
It's a great exercise to engage intellectually with abstract concepts such as socialism, equality, community, etc, but thinking and imagining what would be like if they configured our lives is actually what needs to be communicated. It would also enthuse those who have the task of communicating these ideas as well.
That's exactly it. It's what I spend all my time thinking about, and as a teacher I know it's the only thing that really works to get people learning, inspired, and changing their lives.
A very thought-provoking piece! This is where education is so important, so that people have the tools (the political abstraction) to understand their current conditions and that these conditions can be changed. It is, as you point out, about linking the material condition with the abstraction and how the material condition can be changed. That's political hope.
Totally agree. It's the only way we can work out how to change our lives together. Oddly something the left can forget about.
Beornn has a cracking newsletter. It's definitely worth subscribing!
Thanks Godfey, same back at you!
Thanks so much for this article.
It articulates superbly so much of what I’ve been feeling about the left for a while now. This is essentially what Gramsci was saying nearly 100 years ago.
Thank you for reading it and for your comment. Gramsci remains an inspiration and his analysis is spot on. Often misunderstood.
Thank you for those thoughts. Thats actually what everything is about. And if we adress and rise questions about our vision of a good life, suddenly there are less walls between people on the whole political scale.
That's right, people fight for their relationships, their way of life or for a good life. Has to be a positive vision and active and creative.
Excellent piece. Salient insights. Thank you.
Thanks for your attention - I'd love to hear any thoughts you might have had in reading it.
I think you’re genuinely onto something very important. The ‘de-abstraction’ of narrative has the potential to counter the normalisation abstraction camouflages. It is much more effective storytelling.
U.S. Political Parties - Democratic, Republican, Democratic Socialist, Green, Libertarian, etcetera interact with their membership the way professional sports teams manage their fan base. As long as the team, i.e., the Party, is winning (in power), regardless of terrible coaching, poorly performing athletes, or greedy ownership, the fan base will stay optimistic. If the Party is losing, the coaching staff, players, management, and owners are all subject to criticism, player trades, and fan base pessimism; but generally, very few fans stop supporting the Party. Independent voters continue to have a soft spot for their home team, but generally gain more satisfaction from fantasy candidate political engagement. The selection of players (candidates) from different parties whom the fantasy player expects will do well as an individual contributor, with less consideration of how that fantasy player's team (Party) performs. I say all of this, because, until Party Politics is totally and completely separated from PACS, Corporate funding, and pay-to-play inter-dependencies, I don't believe it will matter, here in the U.S., whether the Left, Right, or Center Parties disambiguate their "isms" from their platform promises. We must eliminate all private campaign funding.
That's an interesting way of replying that has much to tell us about party institutions. I agree that institutions shape more than political labels alone. My argument is that this applies beyond elections too. The question isn't only which party wins, but how society organises what people become capable of doing together in everyday life. This conditions much more than one institution.
".....how society organises what people become capable of doing together in everyday life. This conditions much more than one institution."
But the "institution" of political parties, here in the U.S., is an apex predator that has considerable impact on how U.S. society organizes. (I need to learn more about Australia's system).
I think there are some important models of what is possible outside party organisation in the US. BLM and Black Panthers (before they were repressed) provided some. And particularly the latter sought to reorganise people's lives.
"before they were repressed" by the Republican/MAGA Party.
Need I say more?
You need to think more about how the state functions. There's a deeper analysis because parties mediate state functions that either major party in the US support and reinforce despite their differences. The Black Panthers weren't threatening because they supported one party over anothe. They were threatening because they were building institutions that reorganised everyday life, such as free breakfasts, health clinics, political education, community self-defence. The response came from state institutions that existed across party administrations. That's why I'm interested in how society organises people's social powers, not just how a party temporarily governs.
Just to clarify terms, when you use the term "state" small s, are you referring to Australia's six states and the 50 U.S. States. Or do you mean the State (capital S) as in the National Government. Clearly the U.S. National Government (The State) with the current U.S. party in power shows no mediation.
And, what happened to those Black Panther Party "institutions," despite support from a number of black congressional members? Their "institutions" were performative, not reorganizing. They were opportunities to demonstrate that black power could be an effective method of gaining a level of fear-driven respect in response to Police brutality.
expand public power and rein in the plutocrats
Once that was done, how would our lives change?
Every democracy is a fight to see who shapes the future, the powerful few or the many, who decides what and whom government is for. Democracy is not a side issue it’s about who benefits and who pays, whether we build schools or prisons, public healthcare and education, or privatize everything. Breaking Free of Neoliberalism in Trump Times: How Canada can strengthen our sovereignty and address the American challenge, inequality and the climate crisis https://a.co/d/0cLbP1T9
We would own more things together, we would stop viewing unemployment and recession as the solution to the affordability crisis. We would end homelessness, and we would stop the A.I. boosterism.
That's right what we need is a strategy. That's strategy is firewall economics look it up.