87 initial signers, including Noam Chomsky and Michael Albert, have collectively signed a document called 'Possible Ideas for Going Forward'.
On the site Shared Program they urge for bottom up participation, so the document can get done, which it only will if people and organisations participate.
They urge everyone who can agree with the idea of a shared program to:
-Read/skim the document
-Sign to show your support!
-Suggest any changes to the document:
-on the forum
-in a blog
-Share this site on social media or via email!
Well this draft 'programme'
Well this draft 'programme' certainly has an impressive wish list of reforms clearly aimed at appealing to almost anyone and everyone with even a hint of radicalism in their bones or just a common desire to be human in an inhuman world, but it is just reformism gone berserk with no understanding of exactly how our modern global capitalism actually works in practice and seemingly ignorant of past historical experience of capitalist reform movements. It doesn't deserve any extra consideration because Albert and Chomsky have lent their name to it. My advice is to bin it now and refuse to get tangled up in the endless task of refining and enlarging the monster!
-
-
-
-
Well.... Do you think that we
Well.... Do you think that we can win a revolution without fighting for some reforms underways?
If so, you're right. This project is reformism.
But if you believe that what makes a revolutionary a revolutionary is the emphasis on not just winning reforms, but winning reforms, that makes us capable of winning even more reforms, and ultimately a new society, then i think a shared program, even though that the mere thought of a 'left unity' makes some people cringe, is a step towards that.
Just because you fight for shared program, doesn't mean that you also can't fight for shared vision as for example anarchism.
h-123, You have expressed
h-123,
You have expressed above the usual misplaced underlying assumption of 'Reformism' as in the earlier traditional Social Democracy that reforms can be accumulated so as to undermine the basic functioning of capitalism and transform it into some kind of socialism, whereas experience shows that whatever limited benefits might temporarily accrue to people from specific worthwhile reforms (supported and welcomed by us) capitalism is quite able, and has, incorporated such reforms in the end to aid it's modernisation and survival which is why Social Revolution is still essential. I am all for the practical development of unity in class struggle, a very different animal to 'Left unity' - the 'holy grail' of politicians.
I find the repeated use of
I find the repeated use of the word programmatic interesting. I looked it up and I couldn't quite wrap my head around what it means. Is it as opposed to revolutionary? Is it more meaning step by step?
I'm just watching a food
I'm just watching a food debate https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ExD1Fy0HSkc and started thinking about where food fits into this because to me it's a massive part of life. It started me thinking maybe that's one of the problems, that the proposed changes are not radical enough in that they are not creative enough. In the above video the chef Rene Redzepi says he would like every child to learn how to forage and for me that is so much more radical and inspiring than some of the proposals there. It made me wonder what else has been missed out.
Added - this could just be my primitivist side coming out, but I think it's right.