At 27/05/01 17:54 -0400, Louis Proyect wrote:
>It was not Hitler's attacks on the Jews that brought the United States into
>World War II
Indeed there is some evidence that the entry of the US was used by Hitler
as the excuse to trigger the "final solution".
But Louis Proyect's post is more than a critique of a recent melodramatic
film. He is using it to argue his consistent case that any compromise
internationally with some imperialist powers at the time of the Second
World War, was opportunist, and that the great international united front
against fascism was unprincipled.
Whatever evidence there is of the considerable negative features of the
allied imperialist powers, that cannot disguise the general argument that
the fascist powers were more aggressive in their new attacks on the
international settlement and on bourgeois democratic rights within countries.
We still benefit today from the positive effects of the victory of this
international united front against fascism.
Much of this ground has been covered over the last five years. The
importance is the implications for today. Whatever he may say, the message
is in practice clearly one of "no compromises!".
So long as Louis Proyect concentrates on trying to analyse history from a
position he regards as completely correct, the longer will he be unable to
engage in the current important issues of what compromises need to be made
now, to forward a progressive agenda internationally, and within the USA .
Needless to say, although he advertises his Marxism list at the bottom of
every post, I do not consider his position to be marxist in methodology.
In fact could Michael Pearlman give some attention to the provocative
nature of this continued promotion. Although Louis Proyect recognises the
existence of a number of marxism lists, the repeated promotion of his own
creates an impression, coupled with his dogmatic style of writing, that he
is claiming only one centre of marxism. It undoubtedly leads to some
arguments on this list being more charged in tone than would be otherwise
be necessary. I suggest it would be more constructive if he drew attention
to his list, say, once a week on average, in association with what he
considers to be a particularly useful contribution for PEN-L
Chris Burford
London
