A • v1ew fromAmerica ( ♦) SylviaKashdan EVERYONE is aware that the 1960s began another period of profound crisis and radical upheavals all over the capi- ~ talist world - and not excluding the so-called socialist countries such as Czechoslovakia and Poland nor the so-called underdeveloped countries such as Mexico. The basis of this crisis is the same, although the response has varied in accordance with local conditions. Its roots lie in the inability of commodity society, which has become global in its influence, to permanently or even temporarily (except superficially) satisfy human needs. This inability is manifested on all Ievels for all to witness: from the «national political sphere» to the domain of the economy and not excluding the very persona! daily lives of all individuals enmeshed in the social order. Its recognition is unavoidable at moments of crisis, although 1t continues to be a fact of life when everything seems to be functioning smoothly. Here in the United States the New Deal governmental cooperation with labor unions during the 1930s led many leftist intellectuals to believe that the capitallst class of the U.S. had finally found a way to deliver the goods and satisfy the population without socialism; in the 1940s they agreed with the necessity of the population's putting off satisfaction until after the War's victory and «liberation;» in the 1950s most accepted (•) Part of the continutng ùlscusslon on the contemporary crlsls. • Le thème initial de l'analyse proposée ~t le suivant : considérant que Mai 1968, en t'rance, a signifié un refus total de la société par une fraction imporbnte de la jeunesse, en majorité étudiante, comment entendre le phénomène de récupération - partiel ou général - de ce mouvement par les partis, les syndicats, les institutions, l'ensemble sociétaire ? Quelles sont les limites du récupérable ? Quelles sont les limites des mouvements spontanés? Le cas français est-il semblable à ceux des Etats-Unis, du Japon, de l'Allemagne? 20
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTExMDY2NQ==