File spoon-archives/marxism-international.archive/marxism-international_1997/marxism-international.9710, message 127


Date: 	Tue, 7 Oct 1997 21:23:01 -0800
Subject: Re: M-I: Re: Zizek on PKs



My reply to the following of Doug needs to be emended.

>there are elements of contradiction here. The rhetoric of the PKs is a lot
>softer than old-fashioned hardass patriarchy - it's full of reference to
>Christian love, and is anti-racist, so it does contain "precisely those
>features of [Christian] religion." I'm not trying to say either of these
>groups are populated by revolutionaries or sweethearts - I'm just urging
>you to see them as embodying contradictions.

Oh, yes, the rhetoric of the PK's is only now softer than old-fashioned
hardass patriarchy. The PKs know their PR (as does their friend Ralph Reed,
at once a supporter and an inspiration for the PKs), they are not going to
create controversy and discredit the movement before they have built it to
sufficient number to withstand the criticisms which will mount once the
reveal their true nature.  But if you tune into the discussions of the PK
on the family channel or Pat Robertson's network, you will see open
reference *already* to hardass patriarchy.

 We should not ignore  that there is displeasure, discomfort and often real
anger within the working class about things like the NOI and the PK,
especially among but not only among women. I think it is a terrible thing
to contribute to the silencing of these voices or even to make them think
that their frustration is a simplistic reaction. Yes, maybe there is a
million PKs, but there are probably as many working class people who don't
like them at all. And who are the PKs anyway; one of their leaders is a
football coach, others may be in the reserves, others may be cops, others
may be church leaders. That they are mostly in such institutions would
explain why it is easy to reach them and organize them to show up. But this
is only my guess. any evidence yet on their social and occupational
composition?

  I am worried that Marxists may only work to make the spectacle all the
more overpowering even to those who can only see in the PKs the realization
of dystopic, pessismistic and depressing social trends.

My sense is that Marxists don't identify with those voices, often women or
"pussy" men, because they are themselves a wimpy bunch who dare not speak
up against a football coach and his call for male bonding. It's not about
understanding  the working class but fear of the thug leadership that we
refuse to acknowledge the PK for what they are--a proto-fascist
organization.   We content ourselves thinking there is somthing
contradictory about what they are doing, instead of doing what we
must--finding them and fighting them with the only weapons we've got: our
pussy-assed intellectualizing as a football coach may put it.

Rakesh




     --- from list marxism-international-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---

   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005