AMERICAN POLITICS:

HILLARY'S GIFT TO WOMEN:

While browsing through the source for the last piece reposted here Molly came on this true gem, written by Barbara Ehrenreich. Ehrenreich has always been a favourite of Molly's. She is one of the few leftist pundits in the USA with a truly independent, perceptive and intelligent mind, one never afraid to step on any toes, leftist or rightist, in pursuit of the truth. A person who has never been afraid of the political correctness cultism that smothers the American left. Here's her latest. Enjoy.

..............................

Hillary's Gift to Women
By Barbara Ehrenreich

In Friday's New York Times, Susan Faludi rejoiced over Hillary Clinton's destruction of the myth of female prissiness and innate moral superiority, hailing Clinton's "no-holds-barred pugnacity" and her media reputation as "nasty" and "ruthless." Future female presidential candidates will owe a lot to the race of 2008, Faludi wrote, "when Hillary Clinton broke through the glass floor and got down with the boys."

I share Faludi's glee--up to a point. Surely no one will ever dare argue that women lack the temperament for political combat. But by running a racially tinged campaign, lying about her foreign policy experience and repeatedly seeming to favor McCain over her Democratic opponent, Clinton didn't just break through the "glass floor," she set a new low for floors in general, and would, if she could have gotten within arm's reach, have rubbed the broken glass into Obama's face.

A mere decade ago Francis Fukuyama fretted in Foreign Affairs that the world was too dangerous for the West to be entrusted to graying female leaders, whose aversion to violence was, as he established with numerous examples from chimpanzee society, "rooted in biology." The counter-example of Margaret Thatcher, perhaps the first of head of state to start a war for the sole purpose of pumping up her approval ratings, led him to concede that "biology is not destiny." But it was still a good reason to vote for a prehistoric-style club-wielding male.
Not to worry though, Francis. Far from being the stereotypical feminist-pacifist of your imagination, the woman to get closest to the Oval Office has promised to "obliterate" the toddlers of Tehran--along, of course, with the bomb-builders and Hezbollah supporters. Earlier on, Clinton foreswore even talking to presumptive bad guys, although women are supposed to be the talk addicts of the species. Watch out--was her distinctly unladylike message to Hugo Chávez, Kim Jong-Il and the rest of them--or I'll rip you a new one.

There's a reason it's been so easy for men to overlook women's capacity for aggression. As every student of Women's Studies 101 knows, what's called aggression in men is usually trivialized as "bitchiness" in women: men get angry; women suffer from bouts of inexplicable, hormonally-driven, hostility. So give Clinton credit for defying the belittling stereotype: she's been visibly angry for months, if not decades, and it can't all have been PMS.

But did we really need another lesson in the female capacity for ruthless aggression? Any illusions I had about the innate moral superiority of women ended four years ago with Abu Ghraib. Recall that three out of the five prison guards prosecuted for the torture and sexual humiliation of prisoners were women. The prison was directed by a woman, Gen. Janis Karpinski, and the top US intelligence officer in Iraq, who also was responsible for reviewing the status of detainees before their release, was Major Gen. Barbara Fast. Not to mention that the US official ultimately responsible for managing the occupation of Iraq at the time was Condoleezza Rice. Whatever violent and evil things men can do, women can do too, and if the capacity for cruelty is a criterion for leadership, as Fukuyama suggested, then Lynndie England should consider following up her stint in the brig with a run for the Senate.

It's important--even kind of exhilarating--for women to embrace their inner bitch, but the point should be to expand our sense of human possibility, not to enshrine aggression as a virtue. Women can behave like the warrior queen Boadicea, credited with slaughtering 70,000, many of them civilians, or like Margaret Thatcher, who attempted to dismantle the British welfare state. Men, for their part, are free to take as their role models the pacifist leaders Martin Luther King and Mahatma Gandhi. Biology conditions us in all kinds of ways we might not even be aware of yet. But virtue is always a choice.

Hillary Clinton smashed the myth of innate female moral superiority in the worst possible way--by demonstrating female moral inferiority. We didn't really need her racial innuendos and free-floating bellicosity to establish that women aren't wimps. As a generation of young feminists realizes, the values once thought to be uniquely and genetically female--such as compassion and an aversion to violence--can be found in either sex, and sometimes it's a man who best upholds them.
Get The Nation at home (and online!) for 75 cents a week!
If you like this article, consider making a donation to The Nation.

PATHOLOGIES OF HOPE:

Barbara Ehrenreich has long been one of Molly's favourite left wing writers. She's had a long and distinguished career on the left, and her feminist books such as 'Witches, Midwives and Nurses:A History of Women Healers', Complaints and Disorders:The Sexual Politics of Sickness', 'For Her Own Good:100 Years of the Experts' Advise to Women' amongst others have become classics. Ehrenreich began her adult life as a scientist, beginning with physics and later obtaining a PhD in cell biology from Rockefeller University. her interest in social change, however, drew her away from pursuing a career in science and she embarked on a life in journalism. She is presently co-chair of the Democratic Socialists of America.

Ehrenreich is one of that small breed of writers whom Molly terms as "Marxists with a mind". Even though she had a youthful flirtation with Maoism, as most of her generation of American radicals did she rapidly recovered from the foolishness. She later came into contact with two ideas that would pretty well seal her exit from both the world of the sects and the claustrophobic world of acceptable American academic leftism. In 1977, long before the "discovery" of the 'professional-managerial class' by what is now Parecon, she wrote an essay for the journal Radical America called 'The Professional-Managerial Class'. She was hardly original in identifying this class which Marxists generally make heroic efforts in ignoring. Anarchists such as Bakunin formulated a crude description of what it meant many decades before it came to power for the first time. The idea was fleshed out by other people to the left of Marxism such as Machaijski and his admirer Max Nomad decades before Ehrenreich was born. The most grandiose description of this new ruling class was made by James Burnham in 'The Managerial Revolution' as he was making his supersonic transition from Trotskyism to conservativism. The phenomenon was extensively described before Burnham by the non-radical economists Berle and Means.

The main point about this is that once you come in contact with this idea-even if you don't know its full historical pedigree- and begin to take it seriously you can no longer remain a "revolutionary Marxist" in any sense, and you will also be provided with a tool that allows you scepticism about the fads that pass as "theory" amongst the American academic left. Where you go from there is anybody's guess. Some may follow the well trodden road of "repentant leftist" and make a career of attacking their own ex-comrades for the entertainment of conservatives. Burnham certainly did this. But the prospect of becoming a court jester doesn't appeal to everybody. Many others such as Ehrenreich, Michael Albert, Christopher Lasch, etc. may draw different conclusions from seeing this reality. They may become social democrats like Ehrenreich, may become anarchists or may try and formulate a new way to avoid the dangers of traditional leftism, as Albert has done. The whole thing is a "door jamb" that keeps the mind of the Marxist open and allows the fresh air to blow in from outside. The fresh air that cleans out the odors of rhetorical thinking, whether it be traditional Leninism or the "issue du jour" of activist and academic leftism.

The second thing that Ehrenreich came into contact with that helped open her to reality was the ideas of evolutionary psychology. This is hardly as much of a "clincher" as realizing that left wing movements often (usually ?) disguise the efforts of a would be new ruling class to come to power or to shift resources to others of their class within the present society. Knowing that there is a large component of genetics in modern human behavior will perhaps help you to decipher the agonistic behavior of leftist groups. It may give you the tools to see how dominance is achieved even in those groups that eschew the whole idea of dominance as "the work of the devil". What it won't do is allow you to see how leftist social campaigns that end in providing little more than jobs for those who wish to manipulate others come about. It will, however, bring a large amount of fury and denunciation on you if your are "indiscreet" or if your leftist opponents are swift enough to see what you are doing. In the end the ability of leftists who are statist, Leninist or otherwise, depends on the belief in a "blank slate" that well intentioned individuals can write upon by legislation and coercion. Challenging this misconception, however, is hardly as direct a challenge as saying that there are others than "capitalists" who can rule, sometimes much more brutally than the capitalists ever could. Exposing the existence of would be rulers is far more offensive to them than arguing about their ideological justifications.

Ehrenreich took on the ideas of evolutionary psychology seriously in 'Blood Rites:Origin and History of the Passions of War' (1991), and her use of them is extended in her latest book 'Dancing in the Streets' (2007). The good and the bad of humanity if you will. Molly has recently finished reading 'Dancing in the Streets', and I hope to have time to review it here.

Ehrenreich's engagement with ideas such as this have certainly moved her further into the "libertarian camp" as her 1997 essay for The Nation 'When Government Gets Mean:Confessions of a Recovering Statist' where she challenged the left's reliance on government initiatives and put forward an agenda of small scale, grass roots actions such as cooperatives, squats, union action, mutual aid centres that would hardly be disagreed with by anarchists, especially mutualists. Since then Ehrenreich has held to this orientation, even while, as the social democrat that she is now, giving a despairing nod to electoral politics.

Hope and despair!!! the essay that Molly has recently read, 'Pathologies of Hope', not only takes on the ugly and trendy multi-billion dollar ($5.62 billion in 2005 according to the essay but probably much higher) "self-help" industry in the USA but also makes a direct attack on the whole cultural underpinnings of this hucksterism. From "positive thinking", through the academic fad of "happiness studies", the "prosperity preachers" to the supposed scientific evidence for optimism as a benefit to health, Ehrenreich takes a swipe at it all. She also lays out the downside of this cultural belief, something universally ignored by its believers. Go on over to the link above to see what she has to say. You may not agree with it all, but at least you will be intellectually stimulated.

MOLLY NOTE:

How can one recognize "Marxists with a mind" ? It's hardly as simple as looking for quotes in their writings where they say "Marx was wrong". The sort of situation where intelligent Marxists deviate from the orthodoxy in their own field of expertise while retaining a belief in the correctness of the ideology is fairly widespread. The ideology of Marxism bears no close scrutiny anywhere. Its methods and conclusions have been recognized as false for over 100 years. The quasi religious nature of Marxism, however, as a total world view allows intelligent people to say that Marxism is wrong about things they know more than a little about while still believing in it as an act of faith in other matters. The denial of Marxist conclusions in one aspect hardly qualifies a writer as a "Marxist with a mind". It merely says that they are knowledgeable and intelligent. It doesn't mean that they have learned to think at all.

The whole idea of 'Marxists with a mind' is necessarily imprecise, as it is undoubtedly quantitative rather than qualitative. Go far enough down the road and you are obviously no longer a Marxist in an sensible definition. So how can you recognize a 'Marxist with a mind' as opposed to what could be styled 'an invertebrate Marxist' ? Here's a few Molly pointers:

1)Language. The writer should preferably restrict the use of nouns ending in the suffix "ism" to

nothing but political ideologies. If they use other shorthand terms they should restrict their use to the minimum necessary and preferably make at least one attempt to say that these shorthand terms do not equal coherent ideologies. The writer should at least make an effort to find other words to describe things in everyday culture rather than relying on borrowed terminology that hides as much as it illuminates.

2)Language. The writer should never use the words "dialectic" or "dialectical" in any manner other than an obvious reference to one of their many non-Marxist meanings. This is a dead give-away that the author is incapable of thinking, at least on one subject at one time and that he or she is falling back on words that mean nothing but "look good and intellectual".

3)Political History: The writer must have at least one skeleton in their closet where they are in obvious disagreement with a prevailing opinion in the left wing culture of their place and time. Intellectual courage is a prime requirement for having a mind.

4)Language. No quotomania from long dead Marxists. This may be excused in the case where the author is writing something about history, but quotes from Marx, Engels, Lenin, etc usually mean that the author is more than slightly confused about the concept of "proof" ie that he or she has no mind.

I could go on and on, but lets leave it at that for now.

Molly

LAISSEZ LES BONS TEMPS ROULER:

Today is Mardi Gras, Fat Tuesday, Shrove Tuesday. Mardi Gras is the culmination of the tradition Carnival Season, a time of celebration that actually predates Christianity. In Christian custom Carnival is most prominent in Roman Catholic countries, but it also makes an appearance in Orthodox countries such as Greece. The most famous celebration of carnival in Greece is in the town of Patras in the northern Peloponnese. It actually begins 4 days before Mardi Gras and finished on the Monday before that day.

Carnival was a time of celebration before the austere season of Lent. Feasting was almost a necessity so as to use up meat, eggs, butter and other animal products before fasting began. Most commonly it began on the third from last Sunday before Ash Wednesday, but in some places it began as early as the Feast of the Epiphany (Jan 6th in our calender).

Little of Carnival has survived the coming of Protestantism in England, except for the custom of "Pancake Day". Most of England's "Carnivals are held during the summer and fall. The southern, Catholic part of the Netherlands where it is called Karnaval, Carnaval or Vastenavond preserves the custom as do most countries in Eastern Europe. In Russia it preserves many of the traces of its pagan origin. Also, in many countries of the region Carnival has taken on some of the costume aspects that we in North America usually associate with Halloween. Needless to say this is true in many Latin countries as well.

It's in the Latin countries that Carnival has become the most famous. Portugal, Spain, Malta and Italy all share in the Carnival tradition. In all these places vestiges of the "inversion of society" still linger. In Tarragona in Catalonia, for instance, the effigies of the Carnival King and Queen are burnt at the end of festivities. In fact the festival of Carnival took many of its themes from the Feast of Fools that openly mocked the rulers, clerical and secular. This festival, usually held around New Year's had many elements dating directly back to the Roman feast of Saturnalia.

The most famous European Carnival is that of Venice, first recorded in 1268. Over the years the Venetian authorities many times tried to restrict the practices of Carnival such as the wearing of masks (though "society ladies" were sometimes required to wear masks during Carnivale so as to discourage the exhibition of costly jewelry). During much of the Middle Ages Venice was something of an "adult content Disneyland" during Carnivale. It took the decline of the Venetian Republic, Napoleon's conquest of Venice and the long grey rule of the AustroHungarian Empire to end the party. In the 1970s, however, local craftspeople began to manufacture the tradition pale carnivale mask known as the larva (Lating for "ghost") or volto (face). In 1979 an effort on the part of the Biennale, an international exhibit of contemporary and avant-garde art held every odd numbered year in Venice since 1895, and the Campagnia dei Grandi Alberghi (local hoteliers' association) relaunched Carnivale in Venice as one of the most popular events in Italy, and perhaps in all of Europe. Nowadays Venice, a city where tourists usually outnumber locals at any time of the year, becomes so crowded during the 10 days of carnivale that the causeway from the mainland has to be shut down because of the overcrowding. I don't speak of no place to sleep or eat. I speak of too little room to walk around.

In the Americas the Carnivals of Brazil, especially that of Rio de Janeiro, are the most famous. The Carnivales of the Caribbean, however, may be more festive. On some islands, such as Trinidad and Tobago, the celebrations may last a full month. Carnival is also celebrated in other parts of both South and Central America with varying amounts of enthusiasm and varying customs.

Here in Canada the Quebec City Winter Carnival is a descendant of the old celebrations, though it is held on the last days of January and early February so as to have good snow accumulations and cold enough temperatures for the ice sculptures. Winnipeg's Festival du Voyageurs is similarly held in early February for the same reasons.

The culmination of Carnival in Mardi Gras is not a universal feature of Carnival. In some places, particularly those with a longer carnival season other days of the festivity are more important. In Brazil, for instance, the season lasts two weeks. In New Orleans the celebration of Carnivale was introduced by the French settlers, but it became a multicultural event with traditions all its own. There are numerous "krewes", perhaps over 60 at the peak, which organize parades and other festivities during the two weeks preceding Ash Wednesday. The oldest parading krewes include those of "Rex: King of the Carnival"(from 1872) and Zulu (founded 1909). Both of these parade on Mardi Gas morning. The oldest of the night parading krewes is the Krewe of Proteus (1882) which organizes parades on the night of Lundi Gras (Fat Monday) . Numerous other Carnival celebrations are also held in the south eastern USA and even as far afield as Detroit.

For an overview of the subversive history of Carnival, the actual festival and other aspects of "collective joy" see Barbara Ehrenreich's new book 'Dancing in the Streets:A History of Collective Joy' (Metropolitan Books, NY, 2006). This book puts the whole matter into a comprehensive overview of what such festivities mean for society.

Molly