Re: "not suggest any kind of violent revolution"

12/20/2000, Mofwoofoo Woofuaza wrote:
    > To attain this goal, I would not suggest any kind of
    violent revolution, as historically all revolutions are
    inevitably betrayed, besides the fact that it would be
    violent and hugely daunting, but rather by beginning to
    build these kind of communities (i.e. self-sustainable,
    intentional communities, et.al) to be models for others both
    in urban and rural environments, first and third world.
    

Dear Mofwoofoo,

Let's look at some of the assumptions contained in your
statement, above,

The first is that building intentional communities can
succeed in replacing the current system.  They cannot,
because the project of capitalism is directed specifically
at destroying and undermining attempts at self-sufficiency
in all its forms.  You can succeed in such ventures only
until they show up on the economic radar as a problem to be
dealt with. That's what IMF destabilization ('restructuring')
programs are all about - dismantling the viability of
third-world economies and traditional sustainable methods. That's
what building codes are about, when they make things difficult for
self-sufficient homesteaders.

The second assumption is that all revolutions are betrayed. 
This depends entirely on whose point of view you judge a
revolution from.  The American Revolution certainly betrayed
the farmers and clerks and slaves who fought the battles,
but it did not betray the wealthy elite who spurred the
rebellion and wrote the Consititution to suit their own
purposes.  Just because we have burned our hands on the stove
does not mean we give up cooking. We must have a change of
regime and it cannot be accomplished by reform or by smuggling
in alternative models.  We must face the challenge of seeking
a change of regime, we must learn from the mistakes of the
past, and we must think as much about the final outcome as
the struggle itself.

The third assumption is that revolutions must be 'violent
and hugely daunting'.  What about the ouster of the
post-Soviet East European regimes?  Were those violent or
hugely daunting, once the conditions were right?  Betrayed,
yes, and that is why we must clearly learn our lessons.

There are many good reasons to build intentional communities.
The give us a healthy personal environment; they work out
models for the future; they can serve as challenges to the
regime by the movement.  But they cannot bring down 
capitalism from within.

best regards,
rkm