[Peace-discuss] [sf-core] Re: The 99% and capitalism

[C. G. ESTABROOK]

David--

I don't disagree at all. My last comment was addressed to Stuart's  
concerns.

OWS is not "satisfied with being a middle-class educated white  
movement," of course. It isn't that sort of movement. But a demand for  
"diversity" may make it seem so, and - worse - obscure the fact that  
it is a class movement.

What are those "issues of exploitation - issues which the 1% depend on  
to maintain the status quo - that we won't even realize we're missing"?

Perhaps I'm wrong to hear in these "issues of exploitation" a call for  
Identity Politics.  --CGE


On Dec 4, 2011, at 7:41 PM, David Johnson wrote:

> Carl.
>
> How much more plain can I make it ?
>
> " HOWEVER, the issue of class needs to be front and center and must  
> NOT be allowed to be triviatized(sp. )."
>
> Sometimes it is not so much what one says but how one says it.
>
> I am TRYING to acknowledge the unique issues of Working class people  
> of color and then stating that in addition to these issues the  
> bigger issue of class is what is behind the cause of these issues as  
> well as the issues of unemployment, low wage/ no benefit jobs,  
> denial of civil liberties, erosion of our democracy and the  
> destruction of our economy that is effecting ALL Working people, and  
> ESPECIALLY effecting Working class people of color.
>
> David J.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: C. G. ESTABROOK
> To: David Johnson ; Stuart Levy ; Ron Szoke ; David Green ; Karen  
> Medina
> Cc: Peace-discuss List ; sf-core
> Sent: Sunday, December 04, 2011 6:41 PM
> Subject: [sf-core] Re: The 99% and capitalism
>
>
> David, Stuart, et al.--
>
>
> I'm afraid I've failed to make clear why I think Identity Politics  
> (IP) is a threat to the OWS/99% movement.
>
> Roughly: OWS represents the re-introduction of class into US  
> politics for the first time in 40 years. Forty years ago, US  
> liberals stepped back from the concern for class that emerged from  
> the '60s (= the demand for equality) and substituted concerns for  
> race and gender (= the demand for diversity). I don't want that  
> Great Refusal to be repeated.
>
> Racism of course exists in US society, and it should be opposed. But  
> it's wrong to see the "postmodern trinity" of oppressions (race,  
> gender, and class) as similar to one another. The first two can in  
> principle (but not easily) be solved by reconciliation; the third  
> (the conflict exploiter/exploited) cannot: one or the other must be  
> liquidated (not the persons, one hopes, but the social role) - i.e.,  
> the way the society functions (its political economy) must change.
>
> ===========================
> CLASS PROFILE OF THE US (roughly the same over the past 30 years,  
> even as Neoliberalism has finacialized the society and concentrated  
> wealth at an accelerating rate in the elite):
>
> ~1% = economic elite (aka ruling class, big bourgeoisie), owners of  
> property, esp. productive property
>
> ~20% = political class (aka liberal class, petty bourgeoisie,  
> graduates of a good college, hence "tertiary bourgeoise"), those who  
> want to be like the elite (see now Chris Hedges, The Death of the  
> Liberal Class); it's to them that the highly-developed US propaganda  
> system is directed.
>
> ~80% = working class, and aware of it.
> ============================
>
> Of course all but the elite are working class in the sense that they  
> must rent themselves to the owners of capital in order to live. But  
> the possession of some capital (especially "human capital") allows  
> the political class to do so on better terms than the working class.  
> They are relatively privileged.
>
> The OWS/99% movement appears when
>
> ~(a) members of the political class switch their allegiance from the  
> elite to the working class, and
>
> ~(b) members of the working class give up their usual - and usually  
> accurate - assessment that "nothing can be done" (i.e., only  
> individual solutions are possible).
>
> IP dissolves this conjunction by substituting individual demands -  
> the demand for diversity - for the demand for equality. IP can be,  
> consciously or not, an attack on the OWS/99% movement.
>
> Noam Chomsky wrote fifteen years ago, "American society is now  
> remarkably atomized. Political organizations have collapsed. In  
> fact, it seems like even bowling leagues are collapsing. The left  
> has a lot to answer for here. There's been a drift toward very  
> fragmenting tendencies among left groups, toward this sort of  
> identity politics."
>
> --CGE
>
>
> On Dec 4, 2011, at 12:46 PM, David Johnson wrote:
>
>> Excellent statement and analysis Stuart !
>>
>> Some clarification please with the following ;
>>
>> "- if we become satisfied with being a movement of the tertiary  
>> bourgeoisie, which isn't true everywhere but cuts uncomfortably  
>> close to home when looking at the local group "
>>
>> Few of us are " middle class " anymore, or never were, or in my  
>> case only for brief periods during certain good employment years.
>> Besides, I hate the term " middle class " , most of us ( rather we  
>> want to acknowledge it or not ) are WORKING CLASS.
>> But I understand how and why the term is used by most people to  
>> designate a certain income level.
>>
>> I have major problems with Tim Wise, in particular his rant piece  
>> in early 2009 " The Rage of the Barbituate Left " in which he  
>> attacked anybody that questioned and criticized Obama's cabinet  
>> appointments from the middle of Nov. 2008 - early 2009, which  
>> compelled me to write a counter article " The Denial of the Prozac  
>> Liberals ".
>> Anyway, your following statement is true, I have seen it manifested  
>> all too many times in other ways as well.
>>
>> " And so we see people coming before the Champaign Council,  
>> speaking from the assumption that police would only batter and the  
>> State's Attorney would only prosecute those who've done something  
>> wrong - that's their experience, further supported by daily  
>> broadcast stereotypes of black and brown thugs.  When some groups  
>> are excluded from housing, or employment, that leaves better  
>> choices for whoever isn't excluded."
>> Dido
>>
>> " Lots of people, not just the top 1%, have a stake in the system  
>> as it is,
>> and not just via the distant prospect of becoming filthy rich."
>>
>>
>> " If we're satisfied with being a middle-class educated white  
>> movement...."
>>
>> I don't think anyone is satisfied with that, and frankly I don't  
>> think it is or has been this way entirely, although I ( and many  
>> others ) would like to see more working class people of color  
>> become active in the movement in some way or another, hopefully as  
>> part of the larger movement or as a focus group within the movement  
>> or influenced by the movement ie. the group " Occupy the Hood "  
>> with chapters in NYC. Phily, and D.C..
>> After all, working class people of color have the most to gain  
>> since they suffer the full brunt of the system ; higher  
>> unemployment, higher discrimination in bank loans, larger  
>> incarceration rates and length of sentencing and finally higher  
>> rates of police brutality.
>>
>> Finally.....
>>
>> "  but there are plenty of issues of exploitation - issues which  
>> the 1% depend on to maintain the status quo - that we won't even  
>> realize we're missing.  And if we don't realize we're missing them,  
>> then they can be used as levers to divide us again."
>> and also...
>> "I think the Occupy movement needs to recognize that as part of  
>> redeveloping class consciousness."
>> Very well said !
>>
>> My basic message / topic on Tuesday is going to be in essence ; "  
>> At least 80 % of us are being screwed by the 1% and some in the 80%  
>> are being screwed more than others, in particular WORKING CLASS  
>> people of color" , and that we need to realize that ; " An injury  
>> to one should be perceived as an injury to all ", and therefore the  
>> elimination of those institutional and literal brutalities need to  
>> be part of the Occupy Movements demands for change.
>> HOWEVER, the issue of class needs to be front and center and must  
>> NOT be allowed to be triviatized(sp. ).
>> Lastly, I am going to ask the question of the hosts and whoever  
>> else may be on the panel " what have you been doing in the  
>> community ? " and that to quote Eldridge Cleaver ; " You are either  
>> part of the problem or part of the sollution ".
>> I am going to urge that they get out of their Ivory Tower and get  
>> involved in some way with the best oppurtunity we the people have  
>> had in 40 years to make change for the better, against corporate ;  
>> domination and destruction of our economy, it's use of racism to  
>> divide us and brutalize us, and it's control and castration of our  
>> democracy and civil liberties ( what little we had to begin with ).
>>
>> Comments and suggestions please !
>>
>> David Johnson
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: Stuart Levy
>> To: Carl G. Estabrook
>> Cc: David Johnson ; Ron Szoke ; David Green ; Karen Medina
>> Sent: Sunday, December 04, 2011 11:27 AM
>> Subject: Re: The 99% and capitalism
>>
>> This is beautifully stated.  But isn't it exactly making my point?   
>> If we (Occupy) don't acknowledge the existing system of  
>> hierarchical exploitation -- if we become satisfied with being a  
>> movement of the tertiary bourgeoisie, which isn't true everywhere  
>> but cuts uncomfortably close to home when looking at the local  
>> group -- then how will it call for dismantling that system,  
>> compelling the petty bourgeoisie to choose regimes -- as part of  
>> toppling the 1%?
>>
>> Tim Wise points out in his discussion of privilege, that every  
>> excess prosecution (of a person of color, or whatever group lacks  
>> privilege) implies fewer prosecutions of privileged people.  And so  
>> we see people coming before the Champaign Council, speaking from  
>> the assumption that police would only batter and the State's  
>> Attorney would only prosecute those who've done something wrong -  
>> that's their experience, further supported by daily broadcast  
>> stereotypes of black and brown thugs.  When some groups are  
>> excluded from housing, or employment, that leaves better choices  
>> for whoever isn't excluded.
>>
>> This is just another expression of Trotsky's hierarchical  
>> exploitation.  Lots of people, not just the top 1%, have a stake in  
>> the system as it is,
>> and not just via the distant prospect of becoming filthy rich.   I  
>> think the Occupy movement needs to recognize that as part of  
>> redeveloping class consciousness.
>>
>> If we're satisfied with being a middle-class educated white  
>> movement, then not only do we lose the greatest part of our  
>> potential strength, but there are plenty of issues of exploitation  
>> - issues which the 1% depend on to maintain the status quo - that  
>> we won't even realize we're missing.  And if we don't realize we're  
>> missing them, then they can be used as levers to divide us again.   
>> I hope that's the kind of thing that might come up on Tuesday.
>>
>> On 12/3/11 10:20 PM, Carl G. Estabrook wrote:
>>>
>>> Stuart--
>>>
>>> Someone posted the following remark from Trotsky to Louis  
>>> Proyect's list today. It gets at your interesting discussion of  
>>> OWS, race, & class.
>>>
>>> I haven't the energy at the moment to draw the connections, beyond  
>>> saying that I might substitute  "political class" for "petty  
>>> bourgeoisie" and mean by that what is now called in European  
>>> sociology the "tertiary bourgeoisie," = the 20% or so of the  
>>> population who've gone to a good college (including privileged  
>>> people like you and me). The rest - 80% - we can call "working  
>>> class" without too much difficulty.
>>>
>>> I do think that this suggests why "identity politics" is a threat  
>>> to the class politics that have re-emerged in the Occupy movement.
>>>
>>> [I should note that I've probably made it clear that I'm a yellow- 
>>> dog Chomskyan, thus not a Trotskyist or even a Leninist - an  
>>> anarchist rather than a vanguardist - but I think that old Whig  
>>> Thomas Aquinas had it right when he said, "The truth, whoever  
>>> speaks it, is from the Holy Spirit." Trotsky seems to me to speak  
>>> the truth here, as he often does.]
>>>
>>> I'm going to cc David Johnson, who's on the panel Tuesday night,  
>>> and the other regular members of News from Neptune.  Regards, CGE
>>>
>>> Begin forwarded message:
>>>>
>>>> While in exile in 1931 Trotsky wrote to a comrade about “the  
>>>> people’s
>>>> revolution”<http://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/germany/1931/310414.htm 
>>>> >.
>>>>
>>>> The fascist Strasser says 95 percent of the people are interested  
>>>> in the
>>>>> revolution, consequently it is not a class revolution but a  
>>>>> people’s
>>>>> revolution. Thaelmann sings in chorus. In reality, the worker- 
>>>>> Communist
>>>>> should say to the fascist worker: of course, 95 percent of the  
>>>>> population,
>>>>> if not 98 percent, is exploited by finance capital. But this  
>>>>> exploitation
>>>>> is organized hierarchically: there are exploiters, there are  
>>>>> subexploiters,
>>>>> sub-subexploiters, etc. Only thanks to this hierarchy do the
>>>>> superexploiters keep in subjection the majority of the nation.  
>>>>> In order
>>>>> that the nation should indeed be able to reconstruct itself  
>>>>> around a new
>>>>> class core, it must be reconstructed ideologically and this can  
>>>>> be achieved
>>>>> only if the proletariat does not dissolve itself into the  
>>>>> “people,” into
>>>>> the “nation,” but on the contrary develops a program of its  
>>>>> proletarian
>>>>> revolution and compels the petty bourgeoisie to choose between  
>>>>> two regimes.
>>>>
>>>
>>