ska invita
back on the other side
I think so Ymu. What little cheering he is doing is for the fact there is visible protest and anti-capitalism, but in fact he sneers at occupy
You may or may not agree with what he is saying, but the point is what he is saying sounds like: Occupy = naive anarchist populism, should instead be being "serious" and calling for non-democratic dictatorship of the proles, or something like that.
Occupy aren't being "serious", he's set them up as frivolous (anarchist) dreamers, there to "party"So we should see in this development also a challenge: it is not enough to reject the depoliticized expert rule as the most ruthless form of ideology; one should also begin to think seriously....
there's what he wants, Communism to spearhead the movement. Who will be doing the "discipline" and the "hard work" he quotes? A vanguard for sure....about what to propose instead of the predominant economic organization, to imagine and experiment with alternate forms of organization, to search for the germs of the New. Communism is not just or predominantly the carnival of the mass protest when the system is brought to a halt; Communism is also, above all, a new form of organization, discipline, hard work.
dilute the process from serious communist organisation. Not interested in the 99% populism approach who "dilute", a smaller clique is neededThe protesters should beware not only of enemies, but also of false friends who pretend to support them, but are already working hard to dilute the protest.
This reads like a swipe at autonomism in workplaces, another enemy tendency of centrist Communism.We do not vote about who owns what, about relations in a factory, etc – all this is left to processes outside the sphere of the political. It is illusory to expect that one can effectively change things by "extending" democracy into this sphere, say, by organizing "democratic" banks under people's control.
"Democratic mechanisms" like the general assemblies of Occupy.democratic mechanisms – which, one should never forget, are part of the state apparatuses of the "bourgeois" state that guarantees undisturbed functioning of the capitalist reproduction.
You may or may not agree with what he is saying, but the point is what he is saying sounds like: Occupy = naive anarchist populism, should instead be being "serious" and calling for non-democratic dictatorship of the proles, or something like that.