In a message dated 7/25/2005 1:33:42 AM Central Standard Time, rdumain writes:
>>Liu's mystical-nationalist drivel is so similar to the arguments of the Hindutva fascists, who also have an affinity to neo-pagan fascists in the West, I neglected to qualify my outburst by specifying that Liu's argument was not based on India nor was it specifically about environmentalism. It seems that Liu is actually a Chinese nationalist and apologist for Chinese Stalinism. See, e.g.:<< http://atimes01.atimes.com/atimes/others/Henry.html Reply I have read Henry's writings over the past few years and during the time he was expelled from Marxmail. Is it not over the top to basically call Henry a fascist . . . neo- fascists? The article excepted by Henry was sourced to the A-List, rather than a right-wing newspaper. Your source of much of Henry's writings to Asia Times proves nothing in your contention and allegation of Mr. Liu being similar to a fascist. Lastly, your ridiculous charged of Stalinism - as if that serves as a bogey man, is the ideological bag in trade of the imperialist bourgeoisie from 1928 to 1991. Below is taken from the source you quoted, although Henry has more excellent material in Asian times. I found Money, Power and Art to be substantial. Henry's writings are most certainly superior to anything you have written for this list, which is meant to have a bias towards praxis or the lived experience of our working class movement. You of course are free to take your Trotskyite foot out of your mouth. Melvin P. http://atimes01.atimes.com/atimes/China/FL01Ad01.html China's move toward market economy along neo-liberal lines was originally intended to be a brief and temporary program to kick-start its economy off the stagnation caused by decades of hostile US containment and embargo, made worse by domestic ultra-radical excesses typical of a garrison state. But the temporary corrective expediency turned into a permanent revisionist policy that inevitably led to political instability. The pressure exploded in the Tiananmen incident in 1989, a decade after the launching of China's "temporary" economic reform. Misled by biased Western media with an agenda separate from the target, adverse international reaction on Tiananmen reverberated around the world, causing intense hostility toward socialist China, particularly from the Western anti-communist left, whose members denounced the Chinese government as being repressive of democracy, ignoring the fact that the real culprit was a policy drift toward market capitalism away from socialist planning. The historical fact was that Tiananmen began as a student mass movement to arrest the erosion of socialism in China. Domestically, the real tragedy of Tiananmen was not the alleged abortion of latent bourgeois democracy, as the Western media tried to spin it. It was the ossification of a brief transitory strategy of market liberalization in order to build better socialism into a lasting policy of permanently postponing socialist construction. This policy is rationalized with all kind of revisionist ideological mumbo-jumbo, such as China must first go through a long capitalist stage before it can move onto a socialist stage, and let some people get rich first. The word "first" was then conveniently drop and the slogan became: let some people get rich, period. Yet there is solid evidence that China has successfully leapfrogged into the space age without repeating the costly experimentation of another century of the sub-orbital aviation. It is then a puzzle why socialism has to be postponed and wait for its gradual evolution from a restoration of capitalism. _______________________________________________ Marxism-Thaxis mailing list Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis
