Left Populism (a critique of)

Link: Left Populism (Red Critique 10).

"Fifty million Americans, including some of the most impoverished sections of the working class, have not only not "rebelled" but have actively sided with the ruling class. In doing so, according to the populist mantra, they have acted on their "experience". Where does this "experience" come from? What left populism obscures is that this is an experience painstakingly fabricated in religious and cultural terms by Karl Rove and funded by huge corporate donations. The "spontaneous" far from being spontaneous is an ideological effect of capitalism and its institutions. What is "out there" is put "out there". It needs to be critiqued, not propitiated. The Left sentimentalizing of politics as the automatic agency of the oppressed has not only failed at intervening into the ideological consciousness of workers: it has, by its own logic (experience!), actively cultivated it."

Comments

[Charlie Bertsch]

I'm of two minds about this. I recognize the need for a critique, but am too much of a "left populist" in my upbringing to cross over completely to the other side. I mean, I melt when I hear folks songs about unions for goodness sake.It's a really interesting piece, though. I may try to write something about it for the Bad Subjects blog. I'll put a notice on my personal one De File if I do. Thanks, as always, for the link.

[Jodi]

Charlie,
thanks--right. I am also reflecting on this and not sure how much I endorse. So, another response that might combine your remark and the one from Red Critique might involve something like the recovery of the impulse behind the union songs, so the left culture is there, recreated and remediated in a deliberate organized way. (George Lipsitz's piece in my cultural studies collection does this is a really great way.)

[Charlie Bertsch]

Yes, I loved that Lipsitz piece. It would be interesting to relate the "left populism" article to the mainstream news analyses about the Democratic Party's apparent softening on the question of "choice." In trying to reach those "pro-life" moderates out there in purple states, the party leaders seem willing to give up a cornerstone of their political base. That is, in the name of a populism that makes room for a wider spectrum of the common people, they may well forget whatever sense of purpose they have left. Analogies to Blair's New Labour strike me as highly appropriate in this case.

[Jodi]

Charlie,
I think you are right. Here's something else: in trying to reach the 'moderates' (which as late as the 70s would have been the lunatic fringe of the far right, ok, maybe I'm over-stating this, but anyway), the democrats behave in ways most find contemptible: they pander to polls, demonstrating that they don't stand for anything and so fall again into the trap of not being what the people want because they aren't anything at all, they are just empty, less than a brand or a swoosh. And, this leaves a lot of us in the terrible position of supporting a party we disagree with on nearly everything because they allegedly aren't as bad as the alternative because the only other choice seems politically obscurity, marginality, or what have you. Because I'm a local party hack, this has really been eating me alive, my stupid activities clash with my theoretical position but if I fully lived my politics (which it seems wrong not to do) I could easily lose custody of my children. I sometimes think, well, the moveon approach, or circulating new ideas on the internet is something, but I don't really believe it (although my actions suggest that I believe it....).

Bonus question: complete the following--
1. all politics is local
2. local politics is boring
3. all politics is....

[kevin]

"As union after union offers a proposal for the reshaping of the AFL-CIO, each makes a similar mistake.

Each proposal focuses on leveraging the labor movement's financial and political clout.

As the IAM proposal says:

"The American Labor Movement may be a lot of things. But it is not politically impotent, financially bankrupt or lacking in allies. Its power base is considerable and the potential energy in that power base is incredible. But whether we use our power effectively is open to question."

The strategy is to "build new strength" by consolidating the still immense resources of the AFL-CIO and its member unions, and diverting that strength into capital stewardship, political action and organizing. This is a strategic error. If the labor movement really wants to succeed in transforming itself in a new age, what it really needs to do is "think weak" - it has to acknowledge that it has already lost, and make that useful truth a basis for its strategic thinking."

more nonsense:

http://www.laborcommons.org/thinkweak

[Jodi]

Kevin,
could you gloss this cite and link? what's your angle on it?

[Mimi]

Not to insert an unserious note, but are these the same cats who do some sort of performance-cum-protest at Marxist theory conferences? I'd heard of a group of revolutionary Marxists who arrive at these functions in matching uniforms (with berets!) and pound on the furniture, chanting, "Who made this table? Who made this table?" I've been trying so hard to remember who they were, and the name Red Critique sounds familiar....

[Jodi]

I have no idea--if you find out, let me know.