- 21 Nov 2017 17:25
#14864591
Without dismissing the reality of discrimination based on race, gender, and sexual orientation, there still remains a fundamental problem.
Any movement based on an alliance of factions is inherently weak; it's fault lines are built in as a matter of design. A minimal amount of correctly applied force is sufficient to sunder the alliance.
A truly universal popular movement, however, is almost impossible to destroy. To do so requires a staggering amount of force applied over a long period; the political and economic costs of such a repression make it problematic.
This is why solidarity is absolutely the most important value to any political movement. Unfortunately, the concept of class alone is insufficient (in a practical sense) as an armature around which to weave a supra-identity. The proletariat in post-industrial capitalism is just too diffuse and atomized. The proletariat no longer exists in the way Marx envisioned — at least not as a recognizable and delimitable group that can be organized. In a trivial sense, the 99% are the new proletariat, but they have few common features around which solidarity might emerge.
At a minimum, any movement whose factions are unwilling to subordinate themselves to a larger solidarity is doomed. For the atomized liberal, such a subordination is a bridge too far.
Any movement based on an alliance of factions is inherently weak; it's fault lines are built in as a matter of design. A minimal amount of correctly applied force is sufficient to sunder the alliance.
A truly universal popular movement, however, is almost impossible to destroy. To do so requires a staggering amount of force applied over a long period; the political and economic costs of such a repression make it problematic.
This is why solidarity is absolutely the most important value to any political movement. Unfortunately, the concept of class alone is insufficient (in a practical sense) as an armature around which to weave a supra-identity. The proletariat in post-industrial capitalism is just too diffuse and atomized. The proletariat no longer exists in the way Marx envisioned — at least not as a recognizable and delimitable group that can be organized. In a trivial sense, the 99% are the new proletariat, but they have few common features around which solidarity might emerge.
At a minimum, any movement whose factions are unwilling to subordinate themselves to a larger solidarity is doomed. For the atomized liberal, such a subordination is a bridge too far.
The old world is dying, and the new world struggles to be born: now is the time of monsters. -Antonio Gramsci