What do you think?
What Would It Mean to Win?
Connecting some of the more remarkable events of the last decade—including the rioting in Oaxaca and in the outskirts of Paris and the modern crises of neoliberalism—this critical analysis suggests new strategies for the progressive Left and that forward-moving change is possible. It examines the concept that movements generally develop at times of acceleration and expansion, but ultimately naturally slow down without consideration of their actual effects—stifling new developments, suppressing the emergence of new forms of politics, or failing to see other possible directions. Global in scope and including writings from Leftist struggles, victories, and defeats, this collection of essays ponders the possibility of a winning movement with lasting change and presents opportunities in all corners of the world.
- GenresActivism
128 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2010
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 1 of 1 review
May 5, 2016
Written initially in 2007 as a free publication widely distributed as part of the G8 summit at Heiligendamm, this collection of essays (with a pair of new pieces) has stood up fairly well – although it is less about winning that a discussion of some of the issues the Left has to grapple with on the way to winning. So, given that there is a powerful debate on the Left about prefigurative structures and practices, there is a sense that this is about ‘after winning’, but there are also some sharp questions about tactics and analyses required on the road to winning.
Much of the Left suffers from a kind of academicisation: we’re really good at analyses, at unpacking the forces and dynamics that have got us to where we are but without falling into the cliché of paralysis by analysis we’re much less good at working out what to do next. Some of us a stuck in our Left-ish schisms while others seem to have allowed their pessimistic intellects to overpower their optimistic wills. This collection of essays was written before the financial crash was more than a hint but well after the fracturing of the movement of movements in the wake of 9/11 and the associated ‘security clampdown’, yet despite this there is little that is hesitant and there is lot that is exploratory, and a bunch of things that have been taken quite some way since.
Two essays stand out for me: Colectivo Situaciones’ ‘Politicising sadness’ exploring the politics of the emotions associated with Argentina’s economic crisis and struggles of the early 21st century, as well as the way those emotions are remembered and invoked in conjunction with struggles over social power, technocractic dominance and the like. Secondly there is Euclides André Mance’s ‘Solidarity Economics’ opening up, in ways I have not seen much of elsewhere, the economics and organisation of post-capitalist (which to me remains some form of socialism, but that’s a tough word to build support around) society: aside from is unpicking of what a solidarity economy might be, Mance helpfully reminds us that this is not just localised capitalism, but also that millions of us engage in solidarity economics practice.
For the most part, these essays a built in a prefigurative politics, invoking a kind of anarchism that can be flexible enough to be inclusive (and not too threatening) but can also, concurrently, pose a profound challenge. That they are essays, drawn from a wide range of styles within this broad outlook, means they argue amongst themselves, leading to a further sense of conceptual turbulence on the Left – and it is often from turbulence that the best ideas and practices come. I think if I’d read these when they first came out, I’d have been shouting their praises; the remain stimulating, but the crash changed so much for me that the pieces on the whole do not address some of the key issues of the century’s second decade. That said, the collection is well worth delving into.
Much of the Left suffers from a kind of academicisation: we’re really good at analyses, at unpacking the forces and dynamics that have got us to where we are but without falling into the cliché of paralysis by analysis we’re much less good at working out what to do next. Some of us a stuck in our Left-ish schisms while others seem to have allowed their pessimistic intellects to overpower their optimistic wills. This collection of essays was written before the financial crash was more than a hint but well after the fracturing of the movement of movements in the wake of 9/11 and the associated ‘security clampdown’, yet despite this there is little that is hesitant and there is lot that is exploratory, and a bunch of things that have been taken quite some way since.
Two essays stand out for me: Colectivo Situaciones’ ‘Politicising sadness’ exploring the politics of the emotions associated with Argentina’s economic crisis and struggles of the early 21st century, as well as the way those emotions are remembered and invoked in conjunction with struggles over social power, technocractic dominance and the like. Secondly there is Euclides André Mance’s ‘Solidarity Economics’ opening up, in ways I have not seen much of elsewhere, the economics and organisation of post-capitalist (which to me remains some form of socialism, but that’s a tough word to build support around) society: aside from is unpicking of what a solidarity economy might be, Mance helpfully reminds us that this is not just localised capitalism, but also that millions of us engage in solidarity economics practice.
For the most part, these essays a built in a prefigurative politics, invoking a kind of anarchism that can be flexible enough to be inclusive (and not too threatening) but can also, concurrently, pose a profound challenge. That they are essays, drawn from a wide range of styles within this broad outlook, means they argue amongst themselves, leading to a further sense of conceptual turbulence on the Left – and it is often from turbulence that the best ideas and practices come. I think if I’d read these when they first came out, I’d have been shouting their praises; the remain stimulating, but the crash changed so much for me that the pieces on the whole do not address some of the key issues of the century’s second decade. That said, the collection is well worth delving into.
Displaying 1 - 1 of 1 review