Jim D. writes:
I don't think the discussion is helped by references to an emotion-laden term such as "Trotskyists." On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 8:36 AM, Marv Gandall<[email protected]> wrote: [...]
I also agree that Obama leads a bourgeois liberal party, not a working class one, as we understand the distinction. Whether to include bourgeois liberal parties in coalitions against the right or to organize independently of the liberals was a controversial subject within the workers' movement, with Trotskyists like yourself the most prominent exponents of the latter position. But even the Trotskyists, as I recall, never suggested that the workers', while organizing independently of the liberal parties, should concentrate their attacks on the leaders of those parties rather than participating in a common defence against reactionary mobs or armies - a notion which you introduced into the discussion and which makes little sense to me.
=============================== My remarks were in reply to Shane, whom I think proudly identifies himself as a Trotskyist, but maybe that was yesterday. I was once in the movement and still have respect for what it was, for most who passed through it, and for some of what it's small bands are still trying to do. Now time to get out cycling in this glorious weather. _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
