REVOLUTION NOW

tomgallacher asked: Thanks for <a href="http://revolutionnow.tumblr.com/post/717439171/everyone-thinks-of-changing-the-world-but-no-one">your answer and openness.</a> I've got a great respect for that.


I am now wondering about part of your response.

You suggest that some people are able (willing?) to 'float' through life without taking responsibility for themselves, basically because they are wealthy, or have a 'good' socio-economic or political context. My concern is not (immediately) for them, but for those who are beaten down by their actions. I think that the problem (poverty and capitalism (which go hand-in-hand), anti-intellectualism, inequality, etc.) (largely) is not caused by people not taking responsibility for themselves, but by them not taking responsibility for others.

And so the powerful, rich elite very much do take responsibility for themselves; very much are out to do well for themselves; very much are looking to 'get on in life'. Even, and this is the problem, at the expense of others. (Perhaps this is what you mean and I'm getting bogged down with the syntax.)

You then go on to suggest society is not geared towards helping you survive. I don't know you, don't know your situation, don't know your background; so forgive me if this is unfair. I think society is geared towards helping the elite. Largely this is because the elite (the wealthy, the powerful, the media, the corporations, advertisers and politicians (sadly - in some cases - the church too)) decide how society will be. And it's in their own interests to be conservative (small c), because that way they keep the money, the influence, the spotlight, or whatever it is that makes them the elite in the first place. And if that comes at the expense of the poor, the worker, the outcast, the oppressed, so be it. The elite are taking responsibility for themselves, but not for others. That is at the heart of the problem. (This is the anarcho-communist in me coming out.)

But you seem to be saying that it is the privileged people (like you?) being led along by society and encouraged not to reason things through, not to be questioning, not to think or be challenged that is the problem that leads to 'social decay'. I think the problem is that the privileged can live quite happily <i>choosing</i> not to think about those they are taking advantage of.

I think, consequently, that it is our responsibility not only to think through our own actions (and we must!) but to encourage those who don't want to be made uncomfortable by being confronted by the repercussions of their choices to think and to have compassion.

The question then becomes, how do we do that? How do we force/encourage (personally, I'm for encourage) the elite to see what they're doing?

I reckon that we do that by first trying to do it ourselves (Gandhi's "my life is my message, be the change you want in the world" springs to mind).

Secondly, I think we need to recognise that we fail at doing that (Bob Dylan's "people don't do what's right; they do what is convenient, then repent" applies to us leftists too). We are judgemental and hypocritical (I am anyway, and think if we honestly look at our own hearts we all can admit this.) and this takes away from our message; we demonize the capitalists and forget to love them too, blame our society without shouldering any blame ourselves, and often share our ideals in a disrespectful way. (I don't mean this to be a lecture at you, these are really just observations about myself, but I do think they apply to us all too, at least to an extent.)

And finally (and most likely most controversially - but hear me out), I think we need Jesus Christ. If we agree with him that it is right to love our neighbours as ourselves, and we are honest enough to admit we can't do this perfectly, and if we accept that Christ did love everyone perfectly (as the Bible says) - even forgiving those who crucified him - then we come to a somewhat startling conclusion: Only in Christ and through Christ (in submission to him and trust in him, and crucially, having tasted his goodness and experienced his grace and forgiveness) can we be transformed and renewed and motivated and rewarded and uplifted as we seek to love him with all our strength, soul, heart and mind; and to love our neighbour as ourselves.

I agree with you that the only way we can transform society is by being transformed ourselves; but I think the only way we can <i>truly</i> be transformed is by Christ. And that I think is the crux of what Tolstoy is saying.

Discuss? (I know there's no real question here, but I'm interested in what you think.)

(I hope I haven't stepped on any toes or said anything out of line - that certainly wasn't my intention.)

After the last one, I'm looking forward to your response, you seem quite the intellectual.

Sorry for my over use of parenthesis. I'm not so eloquent as to get my words down coherently without them, I'm afraid.


On a different note, you say above "the capitalist economy is beginning to falter", and we "will see the erasure of the middle class". Arguably, the capitalist system has been faulty (if you want equality of man) since day one - it's just that now it's starting to hurt the middle class (in addition to those who have constantly been screwed over by it/us). I recall Noam Chomsky arguing this very well, but can't seem to find the article.

Whatcha reckon?



Thanks pal!

OOOOOOOOOOOOOKAY buddy.  Lets talk about some shit.

1.  A clarification.  When I say that our world doesn’t teach us how to take responsibility for ourselves, I do NOT mean to say we are not taught to look out for ourselves.  I am saying, as you seem to be, that our culture doesn’t teach us to TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR OUR ACTIONS AND HOW THEY AFFECT OUR WORLD.  I thought this was clear in my post, but I am sorry if my words seemed ambiguous.  I agree with you that the problem lies in the way we are taught to regard our fellow human beings, and also that we have a basic responsibility to help each other survive.

2.  Let’s talk about intersectionality.  The theory of intersectionality suggests that all systems of human classification which arbitrarily assign varying degrees of value to certain categorical traits, such as race, class, sexuality, gender, age, etc., are intricately connected - that in fact you cannot understand one without considering it within the network of all the others. 

You and I are in agreement about the “elite” people of this nation - that is, those who are considered the most societally “normal” within the context of all of those categories.  This does NOT just include those with money however - because being white, heterosexual, gender normative, mentally normative, etc. also allows one to be unaware of the disparity experienced by those who are seen as lower down on the socially-acceptable heirarchy of value.

So to recap, all systems of oppression are equal and connected, and even though the system of socioeconomic class seems to be the worst because it most visibly controls allocation of resources, it is directly connected with and affected by the others.

An example - most states in our country still don’t have laws to protect gender variant people from employment discrimination. 

Another example - women in poor communities are disproportionately affected by environmental injustices because they bear reproductive responsibility.

3.  I do not assign blame to any individual for his/her role in these systems of oppression, because I realize that every person is a product of their environment.  For instance, even though I am thoroughly frightened by what many tea party members say and believe, I don’t think that they’ve necessarily had a chance to become anything other than what they are.  Our socialization process, I will say this again, allows those who are considered societally normal to stay comfortably unaware of the disparity others experience because our culture practices belief in human inequality.  We say all humans are equal, and then we also say it is normal to understand the world through systems of oppression like gender and class. Our culture thereby allows those who perpetuate and benefit from oppressive systems to be morally comfortable with the way they live, and creates fear when those systems come into question.

4.  I appreciate the respect with which you posed your questions, but I would advise you to never make assumptions about someone’s status as “elite” or otherwise.  I was born into an upper-middle class family, but because of the mental health issues I deal with I will never be considered societally “normal,” and I probably won’t ever be able to have a “normal” job in our “normal” capitalist economy.  At this point in my life, I don’t know anyone who is as societally unacceptable as me.  I have therefore had to find ways to survive in this world outside of most social institutions people take for granted.

5.  Finally, I will say this: I respect your religious beliefs because they seem to be based on morals and values in which I also believe. 

But I also think that saying any one human being can have more value than another, even if it is Jesus Christ, is wrong.  You believe he is more than human, this I understand.  I believe that teaching the world that a person can be anything more than a person allows the elitism that you and I so vehemently reject.  I don’t want to have a religious debate, because my experience is that once someone knows I don’t believe in their idea of “god” they stop trying to rationally communicate with me.  But I would suggest to you that the teachings of Jesus Christ are more universal than Christianity - that is, the message can be taught in many different and farther reaching ways which are not embedded with the flawed belief systems of man.