Carnival of Contrarians.
A la Bastille!
There’s something called the ‘Carnival of Socialism’. It’s a rotating list of Blog posts the ‘Carnis’ decide are socialist. I suppose they must be - if I could be arsed to check up on all of them. Like most self-appointed glee clubs it’s terribly dull. The latest one looks as if it’s written by a professional dullard. Somehow Tendance Coatesy, despite its leading position in the labour movement, and the hope and joy it spreads amongst the world’s struggling oppressed, doesn’t get mentioned. In its place too many Quorn pies of bland comment maketh a sorry feast.
← Left is what a real Bakhtin Carnival looks like.
With a proud tradition of contrarianism we at the Tendance are now holding an alternative Carnival, of, you guessed it, Contrariness. Here are some recent recommended Posts that grade the make: Tony Greenstein has a go at David Aaronovitch and ‘anti-Zionist’ Gillad Atzmon (here). Bob from Brokley (where?) is a, “Blog about trans-Atlantic translation, Jews and Jew-haters, the old and new Stalinists, islam and secularism, contrarians and refuseniks, and South London.” Voltaire’s Priest has some excellent musings on religion’s claims to spread peace at Shiraz Socialist. This drew forth a reply from the Grande Dame of West London, Red Maria (not, I suspect, her real name). Charlie, who actually thinks about economics, asks if the left should consider a ‘sustainable austerity’ programme. Stroppy pleads, “can commentators on this please try to debate without calling people names such as scabs and nazis?” Nation of Duncan does a bit of battling for the class struggle. Mick talks up the Japanese Communist Party. Pouminista does a magnificent job speaking about the often forgotten parts of the anti-fascist, anti-Stalinist left. Social Republic has some sharp thoughts on Italian nationalism. The Soul of Man Under Capitalism opines that “the man is screwing you through every fucking orifice…” Ian Bone recommends that we “get up off your arses..” Dave Osler controversially argues against Tax Cuts for the Rich. And Modernity does a Quick ‘Anti-Zionist’ Quiz that is certain to bring joy to members of George Galloway’s dwindling band of last-standers. Rosie Bell has thoughtful reflections on the play Seven Jewish Children. Enty gets ready for May Day.
Finally, 3AM Magazine extends the domain of Contrarian struggle to the cultural field.
This List of Glory is by no means exhausting or conclusive. Be Contrarian !
UPDATE: Modernity raises questions about the other ’Carnival’s’ tolerance of pro-Iranian apologists, here.
Blimey. A mention on the Tendance, Suffolk’s gift to the world. I’ve got something to tell the grand-kids now:) I’m not going to spoil it by mentioning AVPS kindly put me on the previous Carnival of Socialism list….
Actually, I do think you’ve hit on the right idea. Posting the best links one has found in the last few days is a real service to people who pop by. So let’s all have our own Carnival.
I don’t want to be contrary, but isn’t it rude to disagree and squabble? Far better to get on with one’s fellow man (and woman).
Andrew, thanks for that, great idea, I had thought that a Carnival of Antifascism would be a good idea too.
The only problem with that is finding sources nowadays, antifacism is not what it was.
A Carnival of Contrarianism is great idea.
Splitter!
[...] and you can always miss significant issues, so I am indebted to Comrade Coatsey for his wonderful Carnival of Contrarians and pointing me back me to Bob’s, for this important campaign: Strangers into [...]
No, no, nooooo, I wrote the blogpost “What you won’t read on Shiraz Socialist, New Humanist etc” (really should’ve included the Tendency in that list) first, then Monsieur Le Curé de Voltaire replied with the blogpost “Sociology religions and the religious”.
Since Monsieur Le Curé de Voltaire declared “and we all know what the hierarchy thinks of Latin lefties, don’t we” and linked to a moaning minnie of a website, I posed some questions of my own -
Who said this:
“After the bourgeois revolution of 1789, the time had come for a new, proletarian revolution: progress could not simply continue in small, linear steps. A revolutionary leap was needed. Karl Marx took up the rallying call, and applied his incisive language and intellect to the task of launching this major new and, as he thought, definitive step in history towards salvation—towards what Kant had described as the “Kingdom of God”. Once the truth of the hereafter had been rejected, it would then be a question of establishing the truth of the here and now. The critique of Heaven is transformed into the critique of earth, the critique of theology into the critique of politics. Progress towards the better, towards the definitively good world, no longer comes simply from science but from politics—from a scientifically conceived politics that recognizes the structure of history and society and thus points out the road towards revolution, towards all-encompassing change. With great precision, albeit with a certain onesided bias, Marx described the situation of his time, and with great analytical skill he spelled out the paths leading to revolution—and not only theoretically: by means of the Communist Party that came into being from the Communist Manifesto of 1848, he set it in motion. His promise, owing to the acuteness of his analysis and his clear indication of the means for radical change, was and still remains an endless source of fascination. Real revolution followed, in the most radical way in Russia.
“Together with the victory of the revolution, though, Marx’s fundamental error also became evident. He showed precisely how to overthrow the existing order, but he did not say how matters should proceed thereafter. He simply presumed that with the expropriation of the ruling class, with the fall of political power and the socialization of means of production, the new Jerusalem would be realized. Then, indeed, all contradictions would be resolved, man and the world would finally sort themselves out. Then everything would be able to proceed by itself along the right path, because everything would belong to everyone and all would desire the best for one another. Thus, having accomplished the revolution, Lenin must have realized that the writings of the master gave no indication as to how to proceed. True, Marx had spoken of the interim phase of the dictatorship of the proletariat as a necessity which in time would automatically become redundant. This “intermediate phase” we know all too well, and we also know how it then developed, not ushering in a perfect world, but leaving behind a trail of appalling destruction. Marx not only omitted to work out how this new world would be organized—which should, of course, have been unnecessary. His silence on this matter follows logically from his chosen approach. His error lay deeper. He forgot that man always remains man. He forgot man and he forgot man’s freedom. He forgot that freedom always remains also freedom for evil. He thought that once the economy had been put right, everything would automatically be put right. His real error is materialism: man, in fact, is not merely the product of economic conditions, and it is not possible to redeem him purely from the outside by creating a favourable economic environment.”
And who said this:
“Nothing but dismal effects can follow from this error of principle. [...] When the poor acquire the status of an epistemological ‘primum’, what happens to the faith and its doctrine on the theological and pastoral level? [...] The inevitable result is the politicization of the faith, its reduction to an instrument for social liberation.
“The ‘pastoral action of liberation’ becomes one of the many branches of the ‘popular movement’. The Church becomes like an NGO, and so also loses substance physically: it loses workers, militants, and faithful. Those ‘on the outside’ feel little attraction for a ‘Church of liberation’, because the militants already have NGOs, while for religious experience they need much more than simple social liberation. Moreover, because of the failure to perceive the social extent and relevance of the current spiritual malaise, liberation theology shows itself to be culturally myopic and historically anachronistic, or alienated from its time.”
The second quotation in particular is an irony within an irony but you might actually get it.
On a slightly different note, I wonder whether you’ve seen this ?
Thanks Comrade. What fine company to be included amongst: I’m honoured. Some of my favourite blogs, and some I’ve not yet met, but which look great.
to quote somebody who can occasionally be wise: ” … contrarianism, the willingness to fill space and generate controversy by saying the opposite of what everyone else is saying just because everyone else is saying it – an affectation most people get over around puberty.” ;-)
Andrew, you might want to update your post, I have done post on the “Carnival of Socialism”, http://modernityblog.wordpress.com/2009/05/01/carnival-of-socialism-and-ahmadinejad/
[...] La Tendance Coatesy, however, is not so happy with that carnival. [...]