The original version of this article contained an error and has been changed. See the bottom of the article for additional information.
In her recent column, “Practical protests give students power,” Alexandra Tashman argues that students should protest for goals that are “tangible, local and relevant” instead of “choosing to tackle too lofty or abstract goals.
But she has it all wrong. She accepts the terms and confines of the very system creating the horrors all around us, taking as a given that we will live in a world marked by profound class divisions, inequalities, brutality and suffering. This doesn’t reflect reality and suffocates the dreams of students considering whether another world is possible.
Let’s apply Tashman’s logic to another sphere. What if doctors stopped seeking a cure for cancer because they weren’t getting tangible results? Or if doctors in one country stopped investigating a cure for malaria because it wasn’t a local problem? You can see how outrageous and harmful this would be.
Bob Avakian, chairman of the Revolutionary Communist Party, USA, puts it this way: “The politics of the ‘possible’ is the politics of monstrosity. To adhere to, or acquiesce in, the politics of the ‘possible’ is to support, and actually to facilitate, monstrosity.”
If something is wrong, you should work to change it while determining the ultimate and fundamental source of the problem and whether there is a solution.
It takes more than the space allotted here to address the root problem of, and revolutionary solution to, a whole system of capitalism with white supremacy and male supremacy built into its economic and ideological foundation. See revcom.us to dig into this more deeply.
Dolly Veale
Volunteer at Revolution Books.
Correction: Veale is a volunteer at Revolution Books.