What we're reading

File Under "Know Thy Enemy": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Schmitt

Schmitt changed universities in 1926, when he became professor for law at the Handelshochschule in Berlin, and again in 1932, when he accepted a position in Cologne. It was in Cologne, too, that he wrote his most famous paper, "Der Begriff des Politischen" ("The Concept of the Political"), in which he developed his theory of "the political". Distinct from party politics, "the political" is the essence of politics. While churches are predominant in religion or society is predominant in economics, the state is predominant in politics. Yet for Schmitt the political was not an autonomous domain equivalent to the other domains, but rather the existential basis that would determine any other domain should it reach the point of politics (e.g. religion ceases to be merely theological when it clear distinction between the "friend" and the "enemy"). The political is not equal to any other domain, such as the economic, but instead is the most essential to identity.

Schmitt, in perhaps his best-known formulation, bases his conceptual realm of state sovereignty and autonomy upon the distinction between friendand enemy. This distinction is to be determined "existentially," which is to say that the enemy is whoever is "in a specially intense way, existentially something different and alien, so that in the extreme case conflicts with him are possible." (Schmitt, 1996, p. 27) Such an enemy need not even be based on nationality: so long as the conflict is potentially intense enough to become a violent one between political entities, the actual substance of enmity may be anything.

Although there have been divergent interpretations concerning this work, there is broad agreement that "The Concept of the Political" is an attempt to achieve state unity by defining the content of politics as opposition to the "other" (that is to say, an enemy, a stranger. This applies to any person or entity that represents a serious threat or conflict to one's own interests.) In addition, the prominence of the state stands as a neutral force over potentially fractious civil society, whose various antagonisms must not be allowed to reach the level of the political, lest civil war result.

How the Union Resurgence Got Quashed by the Union Leadership in Wisconsin: http://gmfbrown.blogspot.com/2011/03/i-still-exist.html

After that, the movement completely died down at the precise moment when it should have been at its peak. Suddenly everything became about recall campaigns and legal challenges. The legal challenges to the bill were based, not on the content of the bill, but on a technicality about how it was voted on. As such, they can just vote on it again if it gets thrown out. And by the time any recall campaign can take effect, the bill, having passed will effectively destroy the public sector unions. And then, at best, we'll replace the party funded by the anti-union Koch brothers with the party funded by the anti-union Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. And yet, this strategy was deemed to be "reasonable" because apparently "reasonable" and "passive" are the same thing.

I'm More and More Convinced It's the End of the World (As We Know It): http://www.amazon.com/Combined-Uneven-Apocalypse-Luciferian-Marxism/dp/1846944686/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1303488895&sr=1-1

The world is already apocalyptic, and .... there is no event to wait for, just the zones in which these revelations are forestalled and the sites where we can take a stand ... to refuse either a sense of reconciliation with this world order or an illusion of the ease of bringing it down.

-----

Those of us who still find dignity in the idea of the human spirit - who even now consider ourselves as part of "the Left" - ought to discard these reactionary tendencies to hold onto the crumbling past and prepare for the ruins of the future.

Egypt And Tunisia: This Is How You Make A Revolution

The workers, youth, and the poor of Tunisia and Egypt are doing what average people everywhere else dream of doing: they are pushing back against corrupt and oppressive governments. And they are winning.
The tried and true tactics pioneered by progressive movements through the last two centuries are being used again with devastating effectiveness: mass protests, solidarity among working people, and the general strike. These weapons are the reason why our own corrupt and increasingly oppressive corporate government in Washington fear the progressive Left far more than the reactionary Right. It is because only the Left encourages solidarity amongst workers, all workers, while the extreme Right only makes " revolution" with support from factions in the Establishment.
The Fascists in Italy took over Rome in 1922 after a farcical march. Mussolini and his thugs would have been wiped out in five minutes if one company of Italian soldiers had stood up to them. But the officer corps, the industrialists, and the aristocracy of Italy tacitly approved of Mussolini's coup: they knew Il Duce was going to crack down hard on unions, striking workers, and socialists. They were absolutely delighted with the Blackshirt " revolution".
The Nazis took longer to get into power but once again a Right- wing populist party was granted power with the blessings of conservative politicians, capitalists, and the German officer class. Once in power, the " socialist " trappings of Hitler and his cronies were speedily discarded- Hitler even going so far as to murder his former associates in the Sturmabteilung ( a.k.a. the SA, or " Brownshirts"), partly to eliminate a potential threat to his leadership, but also very much because the SA contained genuine revolutionary elements with roots in working class organizations. Even this small amount of working class solidarity made big business nervous.
Now we come to the modern day and the Tea Party ( I can already hear the howls of outrage: " What! You dare compare the Tea Party to the Nazis?!?!" Hey, if it walks like a fascist, quacks like a fascist, and shows up at political rallies with a rifle slung over its shoulder, your goddam right I'm going to associate it with fascists). Let's be blunt- the Tea Party would have never gotten past a few crackpots meeting in someone's basement if it wasn't for support from the highest levels of the Establishment. FOX News pundits, billionaires, and the Republican Party all threw their support behind this " movement". There is nothing spontaneous or genuine about it, except its white hot anger against what Teabaggers perceive as the Other. The Tea Party, for now, exists at the pleasure of its backers.
This is exactly why a Right- Wing movement cannot be considered revolutionary. To establish a revolution, you have to overturn the class in power and make a wholly new and better way for people to live and think. Our own American Revolution did that, much to the later chagrin of many of its instigators. The idea of every citizen having political liberty and a say in the way the country was run was a startling concept in the 18th century. Similarly the idea that economic liberty, in the form of the democratization of the workplace, remains a bold idea even today. The only truly revolutionary movements of the 21st century that promise that are Progressive ones. And the only Progressive movements that have the vision, organization, and discipline to carry through that promise are Socialist ones.
So, to return to our brave friends in Egypt and Tunisia, the revolutions they are carrying out are not supported by any faction of their ruling classes. It appears these revolts were spontaneous and genuine uprisings of working people, the poor, and students. They are deploying the classic weapons of the street- fighting Left: the protest, the strike, and solidarity. I can never imagine the Tea Party, or a similar Reactionary populist movement doing the same. Instead of reaching for a sign, their first instinct is to reach for a gun. The crazies who do the violence on the behalf of their masters in the Establishment are easily controlled by law enforcement. The Tea Party is nothing more than a madly barking dog- sometimes it bites the hand that feeds it but a quick slap on its nose brings it to heel again.