💾 Archived View for library.inu.red › file › ron-tabor-utopian-perspectives.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 13:47:47. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
➡️ Next capture (2024-07-09)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Title: Utopian Perspectives Author: Ron Tabor Date: December 9, 2015 Language: en Topics: The Utopian, organization, network Source: Retrieved on 10th August 2021 from http://utopianmag.com/archives/tag-The%20Utopian%20Vol.%2014%20-%202015/utopian-perspectives/ Notes: Published in The Utopian Vol. 14.
thought and effort into building and consolidating what appears to be a
growing milieu around our publication. Our goal, for the short and
medium term at least, should be to create a network of writers/scholars,
activists, readers, and financial supporters around the Utopian. This
would involve, as it already has, communicating among ourselves via
email, telephone, and in-person conversations, and encouraging people to
write for the Utopian on current issues and theoretical topics.
Specifically, we should: (1) ask the newer people around us to submit
material for publication; (2) seek to include more short articles around
topics of current import than we have in the past; and (3) encourage
those of us who are active in organizing situations to write reports on
what they are doing and thinking.
We should also aim to hold a meeting, perhaps an expanded gathering of
the editorial board, sometime in the future, most likely next summer.
Depending on the turnout, this meeting might become a kind of conference
devoted to future perspectives of the Utopian and its network. I am not
suggesting that we aim to reconstitute the RSL or some other
organization of a hierarchical, Leninist type. My vision, in so far as I
have one, is to utilize the Utopian as the political center of an
expanding group—a network or milieu—of people who are thinking generally
along the same lines and who communicate with each other and discuss,
and when necessary, vote to establish common positions on, questions of
contemporary political interest.
“programmatic” and “strategic” unity. To help clarify what I mean by
this, it might be worth describing what I believe this should not
entail.
“theoretical” unity. By theoretical unity, I mean political agreement on
issues of philosophical and methodological import, such as “idealism vs
materialism,” “the nature and structure of history,” “human nature,”
etc. Leaving aside the question of whether this type of unity is ever
real or even possible (as opposed to being a façade or coerced—that is,
people pretending to believe what they do not agree with or even
understand), I no longer believe such unity is desirable. Thus, while it
is often enjoyable to discuss these issues among ourselves, I do not
think we should expect that our milieu as a whole should take formal
positions on them. At this stage in our lives, we all have different
notions about these “deep” questions, and instead of trying to pretend
that this isn’t so, or shouldn’t be so, we should accept it and value
it. As part of our opposition to attempting to achieve theoretical
unity, we should not define our network as being explicitly atheistic or
in opposition to all forms of religious belief. Instead, we seek broad
agreement on professed and underlying values, whatever their specific
philosophical and/or religious sources may be.
“tactical” unity, that is, agreement about the specific approaches that
those of us who are active in various movement milieus and other
organizing situations take during the course of this work. Instead, we
should leave such tactics to those directly involved in this type of
activity. This does not mean that we should not discuss these issues;
those who would like the input of others on their current work should
certainly feel comfortable enough to ask for it; but we should not seek
to establish a tactical “line” on such organizing efforts. Of course,
there may arrive occasions in which it is necessary that our
network/milieu as a whole adopt a specific tactical orientation, such as
an attitude to take toward a given struggle or set of demands or whether
to orient to a given milieu or organization and how we might do so. In
such situations, we should aim to come to common agreement, if this
possible, on our approach.
establish common positions on our attitudes toward broadly defined
contemporary issues, specifically, what our goals are and how we propose
to achieve them. Such a program might include (I have not attempted to
make separate lists of programmatic and strategic questions):
defined as a democratic, cooperative, and egalitarian society organized
on a decentralized, non-hierarchical basis. I personally do not wish to
engage in extensive debates over which term—anarchism, libertarian
socialism, revolutionary socialism, etc.—we choose, as long as we make
it clear that by “socialism,” we do not mean either capitalist welfare
states, such as the New Deal or the social democratic capitalisms that
currently exist in the Scandinavian countries, or the totalitarian state
capitalist societies of the former Soviet Union, China, Vietnam, Cuba,
etc. These kinds of “socialism” entail the substantial expansion of the
state. Our vision, in stark contrast, entails the drastic reduction and
ultimate elimination of the state.
to piecemeal reform. By revolution, we do not necessarily mean an
extremely violent, protracted process. In fact, we would like the
revolution to be as non-violent as possible. But we don’t believe that
what we seek can be achieved a without a mass mobilization of millions
of people who overthrow existing conditions rather rapidly and institute
their own direct and democratic control over the economy and society as
a whole.
majority of people, the working class (including the homeless and the
unemployed), small farmers (where they still exist), and the majority of
the middle class (as long as they do not seek to dominate the movement)
against the tiny elite/class that currently runs society, and does not
entail a small group of people seizing power in the name and supposed
interests of the working class and oppressed people.
revolutionary, state that seeks to nationalize the means of production
and the instruments of coercion in its hands, as a “necessary” prelude
to the establishment of socialism.
is the necessary, inevitable outcome of prior history and/or of the
economic “laws of motion” of capitalism. Instead, we see our goal as an
ethical or moral demand, something we believe to be in the interests of
the vast majority of people on our planet, and of our planet itself, and
we argue for it on this basis.
modern conservatism and the reformist New Deal liberalism (fetishism of
state intervention) of the capitalist liberals and much of the left.
that exist or are formed to achieve these, such as the trade unions,
neighborhood and civic organizations, etc.
rights) and full liberation for Black people; against police brutality,
segregation, discrimination, state-sponsored and non-state sponsored
racist violence, mass incarceration, etc., and for the independent
organizations and demands that address the specific needs of Blacks,
Latinos, Asians, indigenous peoples, Jews, Muslims, and all other groups
subject to specific oppressive treatment. For full rights and
citizenship for all immigrants, legal and so-called “illegal.” Amnesty
for all. For an open border.
including equal pay and promotional opportunities, family leave time,
access to birth control and other forms of family planning, the right to
control their own bodies, including broad rights and access to abortion,
for militant defense against domestic abuse, rape, and violence against
women.
children, defense against physical assault and discrimination, for equal
promotional opportunities.
destructive effects of capitalism, against global warming, and to
promote the transition from the use of fossil fuels to renewable energy
sources.
intervention in the Middle East, North Africa, and elsewhere. Defense of
the rights of all peoples to self-determination, including the
Palestinians and the Kurds. Opposition to Zionism and the Zionist state.
Opposition to Russian imperialism and support of the Ukrainians and
other peoples against the encroachment of Russian expansionism.
Opposition to Chinese imperialism/expansion in the South China Sea and
elsewhere. We wholehearted support struggles for national liberation and
in defense of oppressed nations against imperialist aggression, even if
these struggles are led by authoritarian or even totalitarian states and
organizations, but while doing so, we do not pretend that such states
and organizations are socialist or anarchist. Instead, we advocate and
support the struggles of the oppressed people living under or being led
by such forces to struggle against them as they see fit and to overthrow
them and establish anarchist/libertarian socialist societies.
spying on individuals and organizations. Full civil liberties for all.
Full amnesty for whistle-blowers.
Specifically, while we oppose the conservative, obviously anti-working
class Republican Party, we firmly reject the notion that the Democratic
Party represents the interests of working class and oppressed people.
Instead, we view it as being a party controlled by the more liberal
members of the capitalist elite who seek to mobilize people behind their
(limited) program and work to prevent mass mobilizations from going
beyond the system. Our aim should not be to support such a party,
including its self-proclaimed “populist” or “socialist” wings, but to
expose it as the anti-working class force it is, if not to destroy it
altogether. While we do not wish to monitor the individual voting
behavior of the members and supporters of our milieu/network, as a group
we are in public opposition to any kind of strategic orientation to the
Democratic Party and to supporting its candidates, no matter how
“progressive” they claim to be.
generally oppose electoral politics—that is, organizing in and focusing
on the electoral/political arena—as a way to achieve, or even to
propagandize for, our goals. We do not think such a strategy, and
certainly not by itself, can lead to liberation, given that the
political parties and the political system as a whole are controlled by
the rich and serve the needs of capitalism. We are also critical of
electoral politics because they promote the illusion that the solution
to society’s problems can be achieved by electing and relying on leaders
or representatives who will “do things for the people.” Instead, we
believe that the revolutionary transformation we seek, if it is indeed
possible, can only be achieved by mass struggle, the direct action of
the people themselves.
revolutionary libertarian vision. Rather than hide our view and attempt
to cajole or manipulate people into fighting for what we advocate, we
openly proclaim and emphasize our maximal program: we seek to overthrow
capitalism and replace it with a truly democratic, cooperative, and
egalitarian society, revolutionary, libertarian socialism or anarchy.
nationality, race, gender, sexual orientation, religious affiliation,
and occupation to join and/or to otherwise support our milieu/network.
Specifically, we are not aiming to build a milieu that consists solely
or primarily of either theoreticians, on the one hand, or of
revolutionary organizers or activists, on the other. While we greatly
esteem organizing activity and the dedicated activists who carry it out,
we equally value serious intellectual work—and the scholars who pursue
it—that serves the cause of human liberation.
is mobilizing around various struggles—among them, against police
brutality and racist violence, against rape and violence against women,
for LGBTQ rights, for a $15 minimum wage, against the Zionist
dispossession and oppression of the Palestinians in the form of the
Boycott, Divest, and Sanction movement, against environmental
destruction and for renewable energy, for full rights for all
immigrants, in defense of the right to bear arms. This is occurring in
the context, and is in fact the proximate cause, of a general leftward
shift in US society, after many years in which the right wing has been
on the offensive. At the moment, the mass movement is largely orienting
to the Democratic Party. It is to be hoped that as the movement picks up
steam, a significant section of it will break from that party and seek
to organize against it. We wish to promote such a development.
Hopefully, our milieu will be able to play some kind of role in this.