I would not say that we are all complicit. This is what I was talking
about when I used the existing money economy as an example of objective
conditions. If you did not recognize the prevailing objective conditions
you could not function. If you did not acquire and spend money your own
survival would be in grave doubt. Recognizing and dealing with the
prevailing objective conditions is not complicity with them. What needs
to be done is that while we are dealing with the prevailing objective
conditions we should be organizing to change those conditions. We need
to be a part of the labor organizing effort and be building unions and
agitating for a labor party and whatever other organizational structures
are necessary to overthrow the existing order. That is not complicity
with it. Complicity with the prevailing objective reality and the
existing order is found in campaigning for bourgeois candidates,
supporting the right of corporations to profits from the labor of the
majority, supporting the police forces that enforce their laws and so
forth. Simply conceding to what is necessary to continue our existence
until that order is finally overthrown is not being complicit with it.
On 9/11/2016 12:58 PM, Alice Dampman Humel wrote:
well, let’s dig a little deeper…with all this us and them, with all this talk of the ruling class as them, and so on…isn’t every one of us complicit in keeping the ruling class in power and rolling in wealth? Every time anyone eats at McDonald’s, KFC, Burger Death, shops at WalMart, uses Amazon, buys any computer or electronic gadget, I don’t care if it’s Apple, IBM, Samsung, goes to a casino, stays at a chain hotel, buys a car, uses whatever to heat one’s home, buys anything manufactured by the big corporations, from General Mills to General Motors, he/she is supporting the ruling class and contributing to its stranglehold on the money, economic structure, political landscape.
On Sep 11, 2016, at 12:18 AM, Richard Driscoll <llocsirdsr@xxxxxxx <mailto:llocsirdsr@xxxxxxx>> wrote:
Miriam:
A very good analysis. I have searched for the dividing line between them who has and them who has not.
I have yet to find the demarcation.
Richard
On 9/10/2016 7:05 PM, Miriam Vieni wrote:
This reminds me of the Tea Partyers who, when demonstrating against the
Affordable Care Act, kept yelling, "Don't let the government steal my
medicare!" or the lady who came here from Croatia 40 years ago and cleans
my apartment who reads Bill O'Reilly's books, whose retired husband is on
Medicare, who works part-time as a clerk for a public library, and who tells
me regularly how much she mistrusts the government. Lots of rage and finger
pointing and many definitions of just who the enemy is. It simplifies the
picture if one can point at a "they" and then blame them for what is
happening. But different working people have various definitions of whom the
"them" is. And that ruling class? Is my son-in-law who owns a piece of a
company that distributes products to pharmacies and owns a 5 bedroom 2
storey house in the suburbs, a member of the ruling class? Is it the
corporations that sell military equipment? The financial institutions? The
military generals at the pentagon? The international corporations like
Apple? And how do you classify the employees of Google, the NSA, and the
other technology giants who use their technical expertise to control the
population? Where does "us" end and "they begin?
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Roger Loran
Bailey (Redacted sender "rogerbailey81" for DMARC)
Sent: Saturday, September 10, 2016 7:51 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Attack on the Twin Towers
It is we and they. It is also not our government. It is their government. It
is the government that they use to hold us down. By calling it our
government you are accepting a role in collaborating in your own oppression.
Those who govern have little in common with those who are governed, but by
encouraging those who are governed to see their government as "our"
government they have a lot easier a time governing the governed.
On 9/10/2016 6:46 PM, Bob Hachey wrote:
Hi all,ways the cause of the attacks against us.
Truly fascinating discussion here. Like Carl, I don't believe I'm part
of the ruling class that has gotten us into this mess by it's greedy
ways and warlike tendencies.
But, like Miriam, I believe that, like it or not, we are all part of
this nation. Yes, many of us ehere on this list oppose our government
policies some of which helped to create the climate for the tragedy of
911. Some might argue that if we weren't actively opposing our
government, that we were part of the problem. That idea is stated best
in Bob Dylan's "the times they are a-changin. Basically, he says that
one should get out of the new road if you can't lend a hand. George W.
Bush echoed similar sentiments when he said you're either with us or
against us. IT is truly sad that the majority of Americans seem to go
along with current policies and can't see how our government is in many
There, that's a good compromise between "we" and "they". That is our
tgovernment. It is not we or they, but it is, more precisely, our
government.
Bob Hachey
