Darwiniana

History, Evolution, and The Darwin Debate

Darwiniana header image 2

Will the OWS join my list of the liquedados?

November 11th, 2015 · No Comments

It is one thing to critique Sanders, as we have done here (see previous post), but the fact of the matter is that anything/one to the left of Sanders has no movement that can run an activist process in the context politics as it is.
The marxist left produces nothing but more boilerplate from the Marx legacy. It was great stuff once, but now sounds like a form of tortoise shell parade. We need the equivalent of the OWS to run a movement stripped of its anarchist mental implants (the real anarchist view blended with neo-communism would be another matter) so convenient for the CIA, and make this reinvent the basic canon in action since the French Revolution. I put it that way since marxism dominates all thinking on the left but is completely useless bombast at this point.
All we need are its basic saga history up to 1848, the Communist Manifesto, an analysis of capitalism and class, capitalism and ideology, capitalism and the state, and these put into a new lingo and action platform with reverent marxist footnotes in the background. This new approach just might have some anarchist higher octaves, but we ought to face the reality that we are a long way form a withering away of the state. A few speeches from Rand Paul and his libertarian bastard offspring of anarchism and we can see that anarchism is as much a swindle as the buggaboo bolshevism. Something like anarchism would be inevitable in a global federation of states, and a degree of ‘let happen’, if not laissez-faire would be unstoppable in such a large system. We can hardly aim at total global control. We need, to start, a system that can regulate global capitalism, and this is going to end up a boring version of the United Nations, armed and vigilant to control the rough over-all dynamics of capitalism. We are not going to deal with this via of the means of anarchism and worker’s cooperatives. The irony is that global capital often digs its own grave by showing the way to post-nationalism: look at the TPP’s Olympian impudence wishing to sue sovereign dot.gov’s on the grounds their regulatory structures deprive corporate ‘sovereignty’ of future profits. That’s chutzpah. Maybe these nudniks are kidding, maybe they are unconsciously paving the way for a future neo-communism which will itself be taking nation states to court in suits of capitalist sin, wrongdoing, and greed.

Again I point to the American Revolution as a model that is no model, a useful opposite and yet cousin: a revolutionary impetus, a revolutionary transition, and a constitutional settlement of the balance of social control of capital and the freedom of individuals inside a postcapitalist system. Such a system might have local anarchist exceptions to economic overall control systems. But the sentimentality of anarchists is not helpful at this point. We lost the OWS and three years due to this wrong thinking. I will guess that an American neo-communist revolution would not suffer the same dna monstrosity growth as the Russian, which let Tsardom be the model of bolshevism. An American experiment could set an example for the world as did its earlier bourgeois revolution. It would be good if that could happen. The result should look nothing like Bolshevism. But I must admit we can’t be wrongly optimistic here. Just the issue of gun control could set a ten million rednecks into a frenzy of populist ‘revolt’, really reaction. Perhaps a revolution should run the tide of an armed populace and ‘fight back’ from the left. This should be promoted and its future demise freely admitted in advance as the rights of gun utopia slowly recede. Maybe it wouldn’t matter. A neo-communist system need hardly obsess over surveillance, total control and no habeas corpus. In a global system the main architecture is the issue, as a starting point. The Bolshevik system ended up recreating the bourgeoisie and punishing the proletariat for the sins of capital.
I pursue this vein because it is logically inevitable. We cannot repeat electoral drivel with full stomachs on issues like employment if we are so transnational as to exploit massive transnational proletariats for our idiot electronics culture. The smartphone may well foretell a new future, but at this point it will be a culture of hi-tech idiots. Let’s face it, the US cultural ‘milieu’ is a herding of idiots. Idiots!

Tags: General

0 responses so far ↓

  • There are no comments yet...Kick things off by filling out the form below.

Leave a Comment