From: fs@cs.tulane.edu (Frank Silbermann)
Subject: Suppose the Left CO-OPTS the gun-rights movement?
Date: 9 Nov 1994 18:16:18 GMT
Organization: Computer Science Dept., Tulane Univ., New Orleans, LA



In the 1-2/94 issue of Mother Jones magazine, Eric Alterman noted that
a pre-condition for any popular American political upheaval is the
creation of a "movement culture" to overcome the generalized feelings
of atomization and helplessness.  He suggested organizing around
domestic disarmament to create a "rejuvenated progressive movement
that forces Americans to overcome their individual isolation and reach
a new understanding of the rights of a community."  Clearly, this tactic
has backfired tragically, producing a reactionary backlash of historic
proportions.

In response to the Left's attempt to portray the National Rifle Association
as a selfish tool of the gun manufacturers, these good-ole-boy sportsmen
have transformed themselves into a "civil liberties" lobby focusing
on the 2nd Amendment.  Publicity from Leftist attacks has stimulated
a malignant growth in NRA membership and increased its political activism,
tipping the nation's political balance sharply to the right.  The NRA
has delivered votes of blue-collar workers to reactionary politicians
-- votes which otherwise would have gone to pro-labor candidates.  The
attempt to re-interpret the 2nd Amendment as applying solely to members
of a well-regulated militia has fueled the growth of the "Militia Movement"
among people determined to claim their rights either way.  These militae
serve as tools for the dissemination of arch-rightwing propaganda, yet,
so long as they do not break the law, there is little that police can do
(many police even sympathize with the this movement).

Instead of re-invigorating the Left, the largely symbolic gun-control
bills passed this year have had the opposite effect, turning the
country sharply to the right, and ending the political careers of
many progressive statesmen.  What went wrong?

The mistake may be that, instead of co-opting American national myths,
the Left tried to attack American culture head-on.  As a lesson, contrast
Japan's success at industrialization with the failures in many other
once feudal societies.  The Japanese succeeded where others failed
only because they modified capitalist institutions to conform to the
Japanese character.  Successful empowerment of the poor and minorities
must similarly take the "American mentality" into account, and one must
recognize that the ownership and use of guns for self-protection is
an integral part of the American myth.

A radical change in strategy for the Left may be in order.  Suppose
it _ceases_ its attempt to disarm America and instead _co-opts_ the
pro-gun movement, out-RKBAing the conservatives by defending the rights
of the poor and minorities to defend themselves.  This will force
organizations like the NRA to chose between the single issue uniting
its largely proletarian membership versus its support for right-wing
politics (if truth be known, fascist-leaning politicians are not so
enthusiastic about arming the poor).  Instead of condemning the NRA
for misusing feminist rhetoric to sell women guns, feminists might
actually _encourage_ this trend.  As gun-enthusiasts convince women
to arm themselves against rape they convince themselves that women
do indeed have a right to control their own bodies and need not tolerate
physical abuse from men.

Once gun nuts realize that their precious 2nd Amendment is safe from
reinterpretation, they will grow lazy and lose interest in attending
militia drills, taking the wind from the sails of this reactionary
movement.  It will dissolve, just as the New Left dissolved when
America withdrew from Viet Nam.  On the other hand, if the Left delays
too long, this malignant movement may ultimately acquire a life of its own.
In fact, arming the poor and minorities may make them them _less_
vulnerable to violent coercion by right-wing extremists.

Promoting the right to keep and bear arms will not necessarily endanger
lives.  As things stand now, criminals have no difficulty obtaining guns,
and neither the Brady Bill nor the Assault Weapons Ban will do anything
to change this; but their passage has triggered a gun-hoarding panic
of historic proportions.  The sweeping bans and confiscations which
_might_ have had an effect are clearly beyond our grasp.  Besides,
the dangers of gun ownership by noncriminals has been exaggerated
(no one is more aware of this than those who write the anti-gun polemics),
and promotion of gun safety and good training will further minimize
the danger.  There is also the chance that more liberal gun-carrying
laws could _reduce_ crime.  Certainly, the right of self- defense will
make it harder for inner-city gangsters to intimidate witnesses.

A U-turn on the gun-rights issue need not be viewed as a cop-out;
the Left can claim that it never had any intention of going
beyond the Brady Bill and AW ban.  If truth be told, protecting
the elite's monopoly on the use and threat of force is traditionally
a right-wing position; the early American extension of this right
from the aristocracy, professional military, and property-owners
to the common workers at large was at the time viewed as quite
a radical egalitarian position.  Perhaps the American Left should
cease trying to copy the progressive institutions of Western Europe,
and instead forge progressive institutions more compatible with
the American experience.

Frank Silbermann	fs@cs.tulane.edu
Tulane University	New Orleans, Louisiana  USA