Re: [Marxism] [UCE] Re: Paul Le Blanc on the SWP crisis
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == On 3/02/13 5:38 PM, "Alan Bradley" wrote: > == > Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. > == > > > From: Louis Proyect >> Of course, it would be great if some "Leninist" sect ever got large enough to >> elect a parliamentarian who >> votes for war credits, as Peter Camejo once related to me with an ear-to-ear >> grin. > > Leaving aside the question of voting for war credits, there have been any > number of '"Leninist" sects' that have had parliamentarians elected. Apparently the Socialist Party in Australia and their local councillor Steve Jolly have spent a lot of time pouring over the minutes of the Fremantle City Council, where the Socialist Alliance has the longer-standing of its two councillors, Sam Wainwright. Perhaps they're hoping Sam will vote to invade Perth. Or that now Sue Bolton won't organise a general strike against the Moreland Council army crossing the Merri Creek to attack the Yarra municipality. Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu Set your options at: http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Marxism] [UCE] Re: Paul Le Blanc on the SWP crisis
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == From: Louis Proyect > Of course, it would be great if some "Leninist" sect ever got large enough to > elect a parliamentarian who > votes for war credits, as Peter Camejo once related to me with an ear-to-ear > grin. Leaving aside the question of voting for war credits, there have been any number of '"Leninist" sects' that have had parliamentarians elected. Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu Set your options at: http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] Paul Le Blanc on the SWP crisis
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == On 2/02/13 10:33 AM, "Louis Proyect" wrote: > [Coey Oakley's article] seems to be close in spirit to what Le Blanc has > said, which > of course is an advance over Mick Armstrong's "From Little Acorns" > article that I critiqued a few years ago. It would seem that the ISO and > SAlt are moving away from the old-school "Leninism" of those days. We > shall see. Incidentally the Mick Armstrong article was titled, 'From little things big things grow', presumably after the Kev Carmody/Paul Kelly song of the same name. I.e. While it presented a rather timeless "Leninism", it referenced a special moment in Australian labour history, the late 60s stock workers strike and land rights struggle of the Gurindji people - and the solidarity movement with it, in which the CPA and and unions they led or influenced on this played a leading role (see e.g. http://www.greenleft.org.au/node/11021 or a longer treatment Terry Townsend's book on The Aboriginal Struggle and the Left not online but available from http://www.resistancebooks.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=809) The song goes: Gather round people let me tell you're a story An eight year long story of power and pride British Lord Vestey and Vincent Lingiarri Were opposite men on opposite sides Vestey was fat with money and muscle Beef was his business, broad was his door Vincent was lean and spoke very little He had no bank balance, hard dirt was his floor >From little things big things grow >From little things big things grow Gurindji were working for nothing but rations Where once they had gathered the wealth of the land Daily the pressure got tighter and tighter Gurindju decided they must make a stand They picked up their swags and started off walking At Wattie Creek they sat themselves down Now it don't sound like much but it sure got tongues talking Back at the homestead and then in the town >From little things big things grow >From little things big things grow Vestey man said I'll double your wages Seven quid a week you'll have in your hand Vincent said uhuh we're not talking about wages We're sitting right here till we get our land Vestey man roared and Vestey man thundered You don't stand the chance of a cinder in snow Vince said if we fall others are rising >From little things big things grow >From little things big things grow Then Vincent Lingiarri boarded an aeroplane Landed in Sydney, big city of lights And daily he went round softly speaking his story To all kinds of men from all walks of life And Vincent sat down with big politicians This affair they told him is a matter of state Let us sort it out, your people are hungry Vincent said no thanks, we know how to wait >From little things big things grow >From little things big things grow Then Vincent Lingiarri returned in an aeroplane Back to his country once more to sit down And he told his people let the stars keep on turning We have friends in the south, in the cities and towns Eight years went by, eight long years of waiting Till one day a tall stranger appeared in the land And he came with lawyers and he came with great ceremony And through Vincent's fingers poured a handful of sand >From little things big things grow >From little things big things grow That was the story of Vincent Lingairri But this is the story of something much more How power and privilege can not move a people Who know where they stand and stand in the law >From little things big things grow >From little things big things grow >From little things big things grow >From little things big things grow Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu Set your options at: http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] Marxist critique of Leninism
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == Hi Mark, As a materialist, I agree with you that "pie in the sky" discussions about Socialist organization are both essential and at the same time meaningless "differences in vocabulary". That's dialectics for you. It is in the heat of the revolutionary moment that the difference between a disciplined party and a Workers' council will become evident. A party means that broad coordination can be achieved between different sectors and their overall action unified in order to accomplish a single goal, that of the working class seizing power. However, the same objective can be accomplished by a revolutionary union which federates local unions, industries and localities in order to collectively coordinate the establishment of Workers' councils. The difference between the two approaches is that a party has a leadership that is elected independently and has its own agenda which is to seize political power on behalf of the working class. Unlike a federation of revolutionary unions which is composed of elected delegates from the different unions and which seeks to abolish political power per se in order to enable the workers to organize themselves independently. In a nutshell, it boils down to the concept of "imperative mandate". Delegates from a union have an imperative mandate to follow, they MUST represent the will of those who chose them as representatives. If they do not follow their imperative mandate, they may be immediately replaced by others who will truthfully represent their mandate. Political parties do not have this concept of "imperative mandate", which means that once they are "elected" they do not have to represent those who elected them, but rather work in the best interests of the party. This notion of "election" as giving a, more or less, "free reign" to the representative is the result of the 19th century ideal of representative democracy as a way of keeping the rabble as far away from the decision-making process as possible. In the US and Europe, universal suffrage was a long way in the making. When at last (once Capitalism was established and powerful enough) it was instituted, it was obvious that workers and peasants would not be allowed to decide things for themselves. Lenin was astute and his contribution was to see that the revolutionary movement could not afford to wait for ever. There are always opportunities to be seized in order to further the interests of the working class. The world is in a state of flux, and a certain course of action can bring about many social and economic outcomes. However, prior to 1917, revolutionary unions were doing exactly that. The struggle for the 8-hour day had raised the consciousness of millions of workers from the US to France, from Russia to Spain. WWI represented a gigantic disaster for revolutionary unions, as it became evident that the state could use nationalism to destroy international solidarity and co-opt many unions into the state apparatus. This was the same strategy used by the Social Democratic parties but on a grander scale. Leninism on the other hand gained credibility after 1917. This was the first time that a successful Socialist revolution had taked power anywhere. Revolutionary unionism was swept aside in favour of Leninism, and soon, those segments that were close to revolutionary unionism, namely Luxemburgism, Council Communism and Left Communism were ousted from the Komintern. And yet many who had helped the Bolshevik revolution in Russia from 1917 onwards became increasingly disillusioned with the result. This was not Marxism as they understood it, but a deviation from Marxism. And however Lenin fumed against "infantile left-wing devitationism" many old-time revolutionaries felt that, even though conditions in Russia were still semi-feudal, still there was no excuse for the kind of authoritarian management of the work force that was emerging in the USSR. And then, internationally, the Komintern started condemning genuine proletarian movements and creating "Communist parties" who were obviously in thrall to Moscow and acting contrary to the interests of the local working class. Again , Kronstadt was a watershed. The demands of the Kronstadt Soviet for more self-management were met by fierce repression on the part of Trotsky. Centralized control was now the aim of the USSR. Centralized planning might not be a bad thing when a federation of councils decide to coordinate production and distribution, but when a small group of bureaucrats get to decide the working conditions in every factory and use a secret police to achieve their production targets, then centralized planning becomes an obstacle to the emancipation of workers and results in more ali
Re: [Marxism] Howard Zinn on Lincoln and Emancipation
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == Thanks. Very interesting. Dan Sent from my iPhone On Feb 2, 2013, at 2:42 PM, Mark Lause wrote: > == > Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. > == > > > http://www.marxists.org/history/international/iwma/documents/1864/lincoln-letter.htm > > > Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu > Set your options at: > http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/coolhanduke%40me.com Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu Set your options at: http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] David Bromwich on "Zero Dark Thirty"
==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==
David Bromwich wrote in the Huffington *Post : "/Zero Dark Thirty/ is
tense and well-paced"
This may be true for an American audience, but is certainly not true for
a European audience. On the contrary, Zero Dark Thirty appears as a
tedious exercice in obscuring any relevant facts that may help
understand the situation in Afghanistan/Pakistan.
As though a remake of "Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy" was produced without
any scenes explaining the divergent views of those at the top of MI6 and
limited to scenes of Smiley in his office. Uninformative.
Bromwich compares the film to "The Hurt Locker" and to "Salvador"
Well, Stone's "Salvador" is much more "tense and well-paces" AND shows
us scenes of the fascist villains planning the execution of the Catholic
priest (one of the fascists is dramatically handed the bullet). And
shows us how the community is divided between leftists and rightists.
And shows us that the rightists are mostly poor people who are recruited
as part of a White Terror. And shows us the hypocrisy of the US embassy
staff and the US media who purposely chose to ignore the massacres.
After watching Salvador, we know more about US involvement in Central
America than before we entered the cinema.
The same applies to "the Hurt Locker". The audience understand the
psychological trauma of IEDs. They realize that the distinction between
combatant and non-combatant can become blurred in an insurgency-type
warfare where booby-traps are awaiting soldiers at every corner.
In contrast, "Zero Dark Thirty" does not show anything interesting or
worthwhile. What the audience really wants to know is WHO is Bin Laden,
HOW his AL Quaeda network operates, WHAT HIS RELATIONSHIP WITH THE
PAKISTANIS WAS, WHY the CIA did not catch him earlier, etc. None of
these questions is examined in the film.
Instead, we have Maya, the main character, interrogate a guy using
techniques that would reasonably constitute torture (but are more
psychological than physical),. Then we have her discussing the info with
"the brass" ("he is a courier so Ben Laden must be in Pakistan"). Then
we have her using a dry-wipe marker to scribble the number of days since
news of Ben Laden's whereabouts was confirmed on a glass partition. We
also have her declaring "everything changed on µ/11" and "I want him
dead". We have one scene in which a suicide bomber blows himself up
inside a CIA run compound in Afghanistan.
And that's it. The only interesting bit is the last 30 minutes in which
the assault on Bin Laden's compound is filmed in great detail. The
military techniques are of interest to those who like to witness special
op forces in action, although they are also quite devoid of any meaning.
They rappel onto the roof, use explosive charges to blow up the doors,
kill every male in sight using silencers (zip zip zip), and exit with
Bin Laden's body. As mindless and inpersonnel robots they are superb and
the pride of the US army.
But the film is grossly lacking in pace. It is unidimensional to a point
that is beyond belief : THERE IS NO FLESH AND BLOOD ENEMY ! Not even a
group of Jihadists discussing anything. And the main characters are
caricatures (the operatives who practice torture and recoup data) and
their lives are unspeakably dull. And what is worse, the evidence they
uncover is never analysed in any geo-strategical depth (the only
preoccupation is the wherabouts of Bin Laden) and does not lead to any
plot twists.
So the film is meant as a look into the practice of torture and to
elicit responses from the American viewing public. Fine, it has achieved
its objective. Although apart from waterboarding no physical torture is
shown, and more importantly, the intimate effects of torture on the
victim are not shown (the victims are only produced for those scenes and
play no other part in the plot).
I personally have never watched such an appalling "war film" slash
"espionnage movie". If this is to be the standard for future war movies
in the 2010s, I think I shall abstain from spending my hard-earned cash
on such boring tripe coming from the US of A.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu
Set your options at:
http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Marxism] Tom Walker's latest on the SWP
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == http://rethinkingtheleft.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/lenin-versus-leninism-for-revolutionary.html Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu Set your options at: http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] Christopher Phelps on Eugene Genovese
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == On Feb 2, 2013, at 5:32 PM, Louis Proyect wrote: http://www.solidarity-us.org/site/node/3782 "Opposition to bourgeois culture was the common strand of Genovese’s life, present at every phase. His youthful commitment to Stalin’s Soviet Union, his mid-1960s affinity for Maoist China, his midlife expositions on slaveholder culture, and his late-life conservative Roman Catholicism and hankering for Old South conservatism" For Genovese to go from Stalinism to Roman Catholicism was no big step--just substituting one infallible reactionary authoritarian doctrine for another. His nostalgic esteem for the slaveholding aristocracy of the Confederacy, like his embrace of popery, mark him unambiguously as a late variety of a type painted by Marx in the Manifesto as the embodiment of opposition to bourgeois culture: the feudal socialist. Shane Mage This cosmos did none of gods or men make, but it always was and is and shall be: an everlasting fire, kindling in measures and going out in measures. Herakleitos of Ephesos Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu Set your options at: http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] Howard Zinn on Lincoln and Emancipation
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == http://www.marxists.org/history/international/iwma/documents/1864/lincoln-letter.htm Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu Set your options at: http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Marxism] This is what is to be done
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == http://www.thenorthstar.info/?p=5187 Philly Socialists: Fraternal Correspondence with The North Star by Philly Socialists on February 2, 2013 The Philly Socialists are a local socialist group based in Philadelphia, who are “committed to creating a just and sustainable future for ourselves and our planet.” They engaging in community activism and organizing, in order to help “transform our political and economic system into one befitting of basic human dignity.” On January 5, 2013, they unanimously passed the following resolution for “fraternal correspondence with The North Star.” We welcome the Philly Socialists and look forward to working with them to help advance the socialist left. This next year holds many promises for socialism if we are willing to fight for it. It is time for us to grow our membership, stabilize our finances, reinforce our current programs, and expand Philly Socialists to a whole new host of programs. It is in this spirit that I propose that as an organization we take our experiences, our understandings, and our opinions and contribute them to the productive dialogue that is currently occurring amongst many radical activists and intellectuals. One forum of discussion that would be fruitful for the Party to pursue correspondence with is The North Star (thenorthstar.info) The North Star is a forum of leftists of diverse positions who in their words exist to facilitate unity and inclusiveness across the left through “rigorous and honest debate, which is just the first step in a long, protracted process of recreating a radical left in this county with meaningful political muscle.” The North Star and Philly Socialists have affinities and divergences of opinion, but both groups are dedicated to open, honest, and respectful debate. We both are dedicated to the goal of building a broad left Party to fight for the 99%. We both see gaining political power through such a Party as a route to liberation for the 99%. To this end I am proposing that Philly Socialists begin fraternally corresponding with The North Star. Members will be encouraged to write as Philly Socialists members, i.e. identifying as Philly Socialists but writing as individuals on their own volition. Points of unity with The North Star are listed below. These points should be kept as our “party line” when engaging with The North Star: 1. The necessity of building a Party, defined either as a new political party, a tendency within such a political party, a mass-based independent political organization, or some combination thereof 2. Science as a core Socialist value 3. Taking elections seriously; gaining political power via participation in the electoral process (with an emphasis on winning) 4. Respectful and comradely debate and airing of political differences Of course Philly Socialists members are always free to correspond with whomever they wish and disregard the “party line.” The organization asks that such members would only identify themselves as members when writing within the core values and party line of Philly Socialists.” Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu Set your options at: http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Marxism] Christopher Phelps on Eugene Genovese
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == http://www.solidarity-us.org/site/node/3782 Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu Set your options at: http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Marxism] NYT profile of an FSA commander
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == New York Times February 1, 2013 A Rebel Commander in Syria Holds the Reins of War By C. J. CHIVERS ALEPPO, Syria THE would-be assassin was patient, if not an accomplished shot. His victim, the Syrian rebel commander Hajji Marea, was fighting a cold and had sent a bodyguard out to find medicine, the commander’s supporters said. As he waited, Hajji Marea stepped outside to make a phone call, when the gunman fired. The bullet missed his head, and struck his left shoulder. Months later, Hajji Marea made a fist with his left hand, demonstrating that he had healed, even while the Syrian government’s bounty remained. “The bone was broken, but it is O.K. now,” he said, before dressing against the chill and heading back onto the city’s streets, where artillery boomed. Such is the persona of Abdulkader al-Saleh, a k a Hajji Marea, an example of the antigovernment leadership emerging inside Syria — a phenomenon unfolding on battlefields only intermittently visited by outsiders. Mr. Saleh leads the military wing of Al Tawhid, the largest antigovernment fighting group operating in and near Syria’s most populous city, Aleppo — a position that has made him one of the government’s most wanted men. The uprising to unseat President Bashar al-Assad is now almost two years old. While Western governments have long worried that its self-declared leaders, many of whom operate from Turkey, cannot jell into a coherent movement with unifying leaders, the fighting across the country has been producing a crop of field commanders who stand to assume just these roles. These men — with inside connections, street credibility and revolutionary narratives that many of the Western-recognized leadership lacks — have taken the reins of the war. They hold the weapons. They have their own international relations and financing. Should they survive, many of them could become Syria’s postwar power brokers. The commanders range from secular and chain-smoking former military officers who are products of the same institutions they are fighting, to bearded extremists working for an Islamic Syria based on their interpretation of religious law. Men like Mr. Saleh present both a challenge and an opportunity for the West as it struggles to understand what is happening in Syria and to nurture networks that might provide stability and routes for Western influence should the government fall. Mr. Saleh’s long-term intentions are not entirely clear. He says he is focused solely on winning the war, and promotes a tolerant pluralistic vision for the future. He is also openly aligned with Al Nusra Front, a growing Islamic militia that has been blacklisted by the United States, which accuses it of embracing terrorist tactics. Officials in Washington are aware of Mr. Saleh, and other commanders of his standing. There is no evidence that they have connections with them, or a plan for how to develop relations in a Syria that is partly under their influence. MR. SALEH, wounded in battle multiple times, survived an assassination attempt in the fall, adding to his legend in the Aleppo governorate, where he is the rebels’ primary military commander. “Was it $200,000?” he asked a peer, during a recent interview in a command post hidden in an Aleppo basement, about the bounty for his head. He seemed uninterested by the answer. “Our concern now is only in the military side and how to fight this regime and finish this,” he said. The son of a shopkeeper in Marea, just north of Aleppo, Mr. Saleh took an indirect route to guerrilla leader. As a young man, he served two and a half years as an army conscript, working, he said, in a chemical weapons unit. He later joined the Dawa religious movement as a missionary. He traveled abroad, including, one of his brothers said, to Jordan, Turkey and Bangladesh, where he taught and studied Islam and invited people to hear the call to faith. Life in Syria lured him back. His hometown lies in an agricultural belt, ringed by dark-soiled fields. Mr. Saleh opened a shop on one of Marea’s main streets, from where he imported and sold seeds. He married and started a family, which grew to include five children. Not long after the uprising began, he joined with neighbors and relatives to organize demonstrations against what he described as the government’s repression. When the fighting began, and rebels formed underground cells to plan ambushes, make bombs and persuade government soldiers to defect, Mr. Saleh’s standing grew. People spoke of a successful commander who was honest, organized and almost serenely calm under fire. In many quarters his identity remained unknown. “We were secretive,” he said. “The public knew there was someone name
[Marxism] "Marxists" attack US Embassy in Ankara
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == There's something fishy about this... NY Times February 2, 2013 Marxist Group Claims Attack on Embassy in Turkey By TIM ARANGO ISTANBUL — In a statement that called the United States “the murderer of the peoples of the world,” a Marxist group, with a history of political violence in Turkey, claimed responsibility for a suicide bombing at the American Embassy in Ankara. The statement, which also denounced American foreign policy, was reportedly released by the Revolutionary People’s Liberation Party, and a translation was distributed by the Site Intelligence Group, which monitors the communications of extremist groups. The message, which was released on a Web site that has previously carried statements from the group, condemned Turkey’s policy of supporting Syria’s rebels against the government of Bashar al-Assad. The statement included details that were similar to those released so far by the Turkish authorities, although the group’s message had a different first name for the bomber than the one given by Turkish officials and reported in the local news media. The Turkish authorities said Saturday that the man who detonated himself at the American Embassy in Ankara on Friday, killing himself and one other, was a convicted terrorist who had twice attacked government facilities in Istanbul but was released from prison under an amnesty program. Officials in Ankara said Saturday they were awaiting the results of a DNA test before releasing the bomber’s name, but officials in the Black Sea coastal town of Ordu identified him as Ecevit Sanli, 40, and said he was a registered citizen of their town. Authorities in Ordu said the bomber was identified by relatives through photographs. The statement by the militant group included two photographs of the bomber (in one, he is holding an assault rifle, and a banner bearing the hammer-and-sickle communist symbol is behind him) that appeared to be the same person seen in photographs published by the news media. The group identified the bomber with the first name “Alisan.” The attack, coming in the wake of the assault on an American diplomatic facility in Benghazi, Libya, by Islamic extremists, raised fears that it was the work of jihadists. That the bomber appears to have ties to a relatively minor Marxist group, which was responsible for political violence in the 1970s, is likely to challenge assumptions about the nature of international terrorism and the risks to American interests abroad. American officials, however, have not confirmed the identity of the attacker, nor a motive, and the United States plans to conduct an investigation. The statement from officials in Ordu said on Saturday that Mr. Sanli spent four years in prison after being arrested in 1997 for attacking a military hostel and police station in Istanbul. He was then released in 2001 under an amnesty program for inmates with medical conditions, the statement said. The authorities said Mr. Sanli lobbed a hand grenade during Friday’s attack just before detonating himself, suggesting there were actually two explosions. As the investigation continues, the authorities are trying to determine whether Mr. Sanli had any collaborators. The Turkish newspaper Hurriyet reported that Mr. Sanli had fled to Germany after being released from prison, and had returned to Turkey only a few days before the attack. The group has struck American and western targets in Turkey before, including during the gulf war in the early 1990s, and in its statement Saturday, the group condemned the recent deployment by NATO of Patriot missile batteries in southern Turkey. In a report published several days before the bombing, Soner Cagaptay, director of the Turkish research program at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, warned that Turkey’s support of Syrian rebels in their fight against the government of Mr. al-Assad, as well as the deployment by NATO of Patriot missile batteries, was rallying Turkey’s extreme left. “The country’s political landscape still bears vestiges of violent leftist movements from the 1970s, as well as deeply anti-American ultranationalism,” he wrote. Mr. Cagaptay noted that some militant left-wing groups organized protests against the Patriot missile deployment in the southern port city of Iskenderun, where protesters have fired smoke grenades at NATO troops and burned American flags. Sebnem Arsu contributed reporting. Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu Set your options at: http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] Paul Le Blanc on the SWP crisis
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == On 2/2/13 3:31 PM, en.pass...@bigpond.com wrote: I am not sure if that is mere description or involves some sort of support from Louis, but I would have thought that 1914 and the vote of the SPD for war credits might have shown the bankruptcy of that course. Adopting a "Leninist" party-building model is not a prophylactic against taking the wrong position on imperialism. Ted Grant's group backed the British war against Argentina's attempt to retake the Malvinas. Tony Cliff had a fucked up position on the Korean War. And so on. Of course, it would be great if some "Leninist" sect ever got large enough to elect a parliamentarian who votes for war credits, as Peter Camejo once related to me with an ear-to-ear grin. Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu Set your options at: http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Marxism] The political economy of Comanche horse-stealing raids
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == http://louisproyect.wordpress.com/2013/02/02/the-political-economy-of-comanche-horse-stealing-raids/ Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu Set your options at: http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Marxism] Paul Le Blanc on the SWP crisis
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == Louis says in a recent post: 'I think the momentum is shifting toward mass parties of the left that have much more in common with the Second International parties that the Comintern was meant to replace.' I am not sure if that is mere description or involves some sort of support from Louis, but I would have thought that 1914 and the vote of the SPD for war credits might have shown the bankruptcy of that course. As to momentum, Louis gives no examples, but presumably has SYRIZA in mind if his next comments are any guide. Louis bags out Left Flank for raising legitimate issues about SYRIZA. He says in part: 'Has any of these ultraleftists at Ultraleft Flank read "Ultraleftism, an infantile disorder"? Lenin urges the German Communists, who were probably 10 times larger than ANTARSYA, to vote for the Socialists, who killed Rosa Luxemburg. Imagine that...' I don't know if Tad Tietze, one of the mainstays of Left Flank, has read Ultraleftism, an infantile disorder. I am sure that he has read Left Wing Communism: an infantile disorder. I think ANTARSYA's failure to call for a vote for SYRIZA was a mistake. That doesn't undermine the criticisms they have of SYRIZA and the illusions major sections of SYRIZA have and are creating among the working class in the capitalist state and its capacity to transcend the crisis of profitability without imposing massive cuts to living standards on workers and perhaps overseeing a huge devalorisaton of capital. Having said that I am not arguing that participation in SYRIZA is off the agenda since it appears that those workers who are radicalising are turning to SYRIZA. However it does mean any involvement of the revolutionary left has to be acutely aware not only of the potential gains in the working class fighting against capitalism but also of the dangers of participating blindly in the political expression of that fight at the moment. John Passant, En Passant with John Passant (http://enpassant.com.au) Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu Set your options at: http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] Howard Zinn on Lincoln and Emancipation
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == On Feb 2, 2013, at 11:00 AM, Louis Proyect wrote: http://www.zcommunications.org/lincoln-and-emancipation-by-howard-zinn Not surprising that in a Chomskyan organ there is no reference to Marx's view of Lincoln and emancipation. But very surprising that a historian would say that Lincoln started the Civil War by "repossessing" Fort Sumter when in fact he was quite legally *resupplying* a garrisoned fort. Also surprising his disingenuousness in quoting that letter to Greeley without admitting that Lincoln had already drafted the first emancipation proclamation--to be made public only after the next big Union victory (Antietam, as it turned out). Shane Mage "Thunderbolt steers all things." Herakleitos of Ephesos, fr. 64 Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu Set your options at: http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] Paul Le Blanc on the SWP crisis
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == On 02.02.2013 18:42, Manuel Barrera wrote: Laurie Penney, not in the SWP, has been one voice that has spoken out and strongly on this crisis and its relation to Left politics, http://www.newstatesman.com/laurie-penny/2013/01/what-does-swps-way-dealing-sex-assault-allegations-tell-us-about-leftand, in response to the debate, here is a response to Callinicos: http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/laurie-penny/2010/12/deregulating-resistance Just to be clear, this isn't a response to the current discussion, but to a previous discussion that took place at the end of 2010. Einde O'Callaghan Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu Set your options at: http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] De Blasio sells out
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == Glenn Greenwald on Brooklyn College: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/feb/02/brooklyn-college-bds-alan-dershowitz Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu Set your options at: http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] Paul Le Blanc on the SWP crisis
==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==
I think we want to be a little careful not to turn "anti-zinoviesm"
into another schema that the left must adhere to in order to be guarenteed
growth. I'm much more open to the idea that all types of left
formations suffer or propsper according to the material conditions. To my
mind thats the principle of why SYRIZA has enjoyed a spectacular step
forward - it reflects the depth of the crisis amongst Greek workers, and
not because SYRIZA understands the united front or "anti-zinoviesm" better
than anyone else. The fact of that matter is that most of these type of
formations (RESPECT, NPA, SocAlliance) have either imploded or treaded
water.
On the other hand its not impossible that leninist organisations like
SocAlternative/RSP can find a way forward also. Despite Gary's eternal
shudder of disgust, you may have to concede that SocAlternative learnt
something through past faction struggles (Mick, Sandra, Jeff and Jill
Sparrow and myself were all expelled from the IST), and the last 18
years of slow and steady building. I mean you have to take some hope from
that fact that past bitter rivals decided that they were able to get
along after all - perhaps there's hope for the rest of us as well.
solidarity,
Tony
On 2/2/13 11:01 AM, DCQ wrote:
Just finished reading this. I am honestly a bit confused by it. Not
the content (which is good), but how the debate is shaping up. In
response to the crisis, Alex responds to...Owen Jones? Then the
opposition posts a response--a quite good one ("Is Zinoviezism
finished?") and Paul responds to Alex and ... Louis Proyect (who
likewise only mentions one side)? It comes across as dancing around
the real debate.
Louis wrote:
Honestly I am growing weary of debating "Zinovievism". I probably will
write a response to the Socialist Alternative article by Sandra Bloodworth
but am not looking forward to it. At a certain point it becomes an
exercise in futility. I remember back in 1969 how I felt about things as a
young and enthusiastic SWP member. If anybody had approached me with the
kinds of ideas I have now, I would have laughed in their face. I think
the
momentum is shifting toward mass parties of the left that have much more
in common with the Second International parties that the Comintern was
meant to replace.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu
Set your options at:
http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] Paul Le Blanc on the SWP crisis
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == " Lastly, I'll just pose an observation: that each of these contributions completely avoids dealing with issues of sexism and gender oppression. (Well, to be precise, Alex completely avoids it; Louis admirably mentions it, but only as a "match" that highlighted the *real* "Leninist" problem (could it not be the reverse?); and Paul doesn't because he's arguing for&against the first two.) Why is that? And why is that ok?" It's not ok, Dave. It's an important observation and I am glad you made it and reminded at least me of it. I would say that many of the UKSWP opposition is, I am sure, clear about the gender (and indirectly, so, race/ethnicity) issues at the base of these events. Indeed, I believe such issues--like the national and women's liberation issues of previous "Leninist" battles--are often ignored because so many of the people engaged in the debate are White men. To be fair, it's not really desirable for White men to make the connection between women's and national/race/ethnic oppression and the battles over the mis-characterization of "leninism" (which is not to say all people involved in this debate should not engage them). Women, in particular, should not be a "side show" in this debate; after all, it is women who have born the brunt of this "crisis", which is really a crisis of the revolutionary left historically. People of color have a direct interest in this crisis as well. I cannot imagine that a party of any revolutionary worth, including the UKSWP, would not have Black and Brown voices to have something to say. Laurie Penney, not in the SWP, has been one voice that has spoken out and strongly on this crisis and its relation to Left politics, http://www.newstatesman.com/laurie-penny/2013/01/what-does-swps-way-dealing-sex-assault-allegations-tell-us-about-leftand, in response to the debate, here is a response to Callinicos: http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/laurie-penny/2010/12/deregulating-resistance Unfortunately, and it is a freely-admitted failing, I am not really all that familiar with other voices, including of women inside the UKSWP or of people of color. I truly believe that a significant contribution to this list and to the revolutionary left would be more attention to hearing the voices of women (just found Laurie's twitter and tumbr handle and have begun following it!) and people of color within and without the revolutionary and Marxist movement (Yes, David T., I also believe that so for LGBTQ voices as well). Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu Set your options at: http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] Paul Le Blanc on the SWP crisis
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == Louis Proyect: "Honestly I am growing weary of debating "Zinovievism". I probably will write a response to the Socialist Alternative article by Sandra Bloodworth but am not looking forward to it. At a certain point it becomes an exercise in futility. I remember back in 1969 how I felt about things as a young and enthusiastic SWP member. If anybody had approached me with the kinds of ideas I have now, I would have laughed in their face. I think the momentum is shifting toward mass parties of the left that have much more in common with the Second International parties that the Comintern was meant to replace." * If the foregoing has an element of truth to it [...] what conclusions can we draw? First, in relation to the character of the period we are about to enter. We can surmise that we stand on the brink of a new long-wave cycle – the fifth under capitalism. The forthcoming cycle will be marked by an absence of global hegemony; or, rather, will form a interregnum between one global hegemon – the United States – and the next. Which the next will be, of course, we do not know, as this will be something determined by inter-imperialist competition between the declining power – the United States – and new, rising, ones, and overdetermined by other factors exogenous to the cyclical process. [...] If it is historical analogies that we are looking for, then we can say that the coming long-wave will not have the political characteristics of the last cycle but those of the one before, i.e. that we will be moving in a period more akin to that of 1890-1945 than 1945 to the present. [...] We can expect the ascendant phase of the coming cycle to be marked by a slower and more unstable rhythm of growth than we saw during the post-Second World War boom, and the descendent phase by qualitatively more turbulent than the post-1970 period: the descendent phase of the third long-wave cycle opened of course with World War One and closed with World War Two. But the supervening period was that single period in human history to see a genuine flourishing of socialist revolution. What conclusions can we draw as socialists, particularly in respect of the type of political organisations we should be building? It should now be clear that what should not be on the agenda is the type of organisation that was being built in the late 1930s, as the few remaining socialist revolutionists struggled desperately against time and against seemingly impossible odds to construct parties that would be ready, in extraordinarily unfavourable circumstances, to deal with what was seen as an imminent struggle for power. We are in a period more akin to the end of the nineteenth century, in which the mass parties of the Second International were built. [...] The only political current which today retains any filiation to the idea of socialist revolution is that emanating from Trotsky’s Fourth International, formed exactly towards the end point of that last period of revolution and counter-revolution. But the political practice of the organisations which trace their origins, however indirectly, to this tradition – "leadershipism" and leadership cultism, literary fetishisation of programmatic declarations, bureaucratic centralisation to the point of monolithism, catastrophism, extreme hyperactivism, vanguardism, "short-cut" substitutionism – are precisely a reflection of the fact that these groups still see themselves on the brink of a real collapse of the capitalist system and an actual and imminent struggle for power, as if the maxims of Trotsky’s Transitional Programme [...] were not conjunctural pronouncements contingent on the circumstances of the time but timeless and ahistorical programmatic ones (akin to the way in which Lenin, at the Fourth Congress of the Comintern, characterised the approach of the young European Communist Parties to the resolution on organisational structure approved at the Third as akin to "hanging it in the corner like an icon and praying to it". No: the parties we need to be seeking to build will be built much more in the way in which, for example, Lenin’s What Is To Be Done? was precisely not presented as a blueprint for a doctrinally pure and programmatically pristine centralised "propaganda group" but as a call to, and for, "revolutionary social-democrats", *all* revolutionary social-democrats, to build a party of the Russian working class movement, in close connection with and out of that movement; exactly in the same spirit as the Communist Manifesto, which declared its aim as the "formation of the proletariat into a class", could declare that "The Communists do not form a separate party opposed to other working-class parties. Th
[Marxism] Meet Rios Montt: The First Head of State in the Americas to Stand Trial for Genocide
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == Former president José Efraín Ríos Montt has been ordered to stand trial for genocide and crimes against humanity, marking a victory for the Guatemalan people. http://www.alternet.org/world/meet-rios-montt-first-head-state-americas-stand-trial-genocide?akid=10003.201902.Ar-PMV&rd=1&src=newsletter787848&t=17&paging=off Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu Set your options at: http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] Paul Le Blanc on the SWP crisis
==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==
On 2/2/13 11:01 AM, DCQ wrote:
Just finished reading this. I am honestly a bit confused by it. Not
the content (which is good), but how the debate is shaping up. In
response to the crisis, Alex responds to...Owen Jones? Then the
opposition posts a response--a quite good one ("Is Zinoviezism
finished?") and Paul responds to Alex and ... Louis Proyect (who
likewise only mentions one side)? It comes across as dancing around
the real debate.
Honestly I am growing weary of debating "Zinovievism". I probably will
write a response to the Socialist Alternative article by Sandra
Bloodworth but am not looking forward to it. At a certain point it
becomes an exercise in futility. I remember back in 1969 how I felt
about things as a young and enthusiastic SWP member. If anybody had
approached me with the kinds of ideas I have now, I would have laughed
in their face. I think the momentum is shifting toward mass parties of
the left that have much more in common with the Second International
parties that the Comintern was meant to replace.
I have to get a chuckle, btw, over a polemic directed against Richard
Seymour on SYRIZA written by a Greek IST'er for Left Flank, a blog that
should really be called Ultraleft Flank. It concludes:
http://left-flank.org/2013/01/29/greece-politics-marxist-strategy
"For those who unashamedly situate ourselves in the revolutionary
Marxist tradition, the building of revolutionary left organisations,
like ,,, the SWP in Britain, is the key strategic task if we want a
world without the catastrophes of capitalism."
I was inspired to write this comment:
"Yes, that is the primary task facing the Greek left. To build something
like the British SWP. My advice is to bring Comrade Delta in as an
outside consultant."
The gist of the article is a reprimand of Richard because SYRIZA is not
fighting for a socialist revolution but a government that will do for
Greece what Kirchner did for Argentina. Yes, what a bbbetrayal that
would be.
Has any of these ultraleftists at Ultraleft Flank read "Ultraleftism, an
infantile disorder"? Lenin urges the German Communists, who were
probably 10 times larger than ANTARSYA, to vote for the Socialists, who
killed Rosa Luxemburg. Imagine that...
Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu
Set your options at:
http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Marxism] blog post: why is our work so meaningless?
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == Full at http://cheapmotelsandahotplate.org/2013/02/02/lucky-to-have-a-job/ "Workers in a hospital are sick of management violating their collective bargaining agreement. Their work is ever more stressful: hours keep getting longer; patient loads rise; safety rules are ignored. They tell their union steward that it is time to bombard the bosses with grievances before they explode in rage. He tells them, “You better not do that. You’re lucky to have a job.” In every industry in the United States, there are more people seeking employment than jobs available. Conservatives and liberals alike say we have to put men and women to work. They differ in how they would achieve this, but both shout out the mantra, “jobs, jobs, jobs.” Little is ever said about the kinds of jobs that need to be created. What will they pay? Will they provide benefits? Will they be interesting, safe, fulfilling, socially useful? Perhaps the reason we don’t ask such questions is that we take our work for granted, beyond our control and as inevitable as the rising sun. But looked at in the long sweep of human existence, the jobs we do and the way we do them are unlike anything we did before the rise of capitalism" . . . Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu Set your options at: http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] Paul Le Blanc on the SWP crisis
==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==
Just finished reading this. I am honestly a bit confused by it. Not the content
(which is good), but how the debate is shaping up. In response to the crisis,
Alex responds to...Owen Jones? Then the opposition posts a response--a quite
good one ("Is Zinoviezism finished?") and Paul responds to Alex and ... Louis
Proyect (who likewise only mentions one side)? It comes across as dancing
around the real debate.
That Alex did so in order to set up a straw man is obvious. That Louis did so
is probably because to mention the possibility of the opposition succeeding
might upend his certainty about the original Leninist sin. But why does Paul
bring in Louis and ignore the actual opposition, the ones trying to be heard,
and needing all the support they can get?
Let me make clear that I agree with much of what Paul says. It's what he
doesn't say, and who he doesn't address that I question. (And it's an actual
question, not a pointy-finger-haha-gotcha question.)
Lastly, I'll just pose an observation: that each of these contributions
completely avoids dealing with issues of sexism and gender oppression. (Well,
to be precise, Alex completely avoids it; Louis admirably mentions it, but only
as a "match" that highlighted the *real* "Leninist" problem (could it not be
the reverse?); and Paul doesn't because he's arguing for&against the first two.)
Why is that? And why is that ok?
Soli,
DCQ
On Feb 1, 2013, at 2:52 AM, james pitman wrote:
>
>
>
> http://socialistworker.org/2013/02/01/leninism-is-unfinished
Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu
Set your options at:
http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Marxism] Howard Zinn on Lincoln and Emancipation
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == http://www.zcommunications.org/lincoln-and-emancipation-by-howard-zinn Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu Set your options at: http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Marxism] Social Democracy, 1936
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == I happened across this election leaflet from Saskatchewan 1936. The CCF was the forerunner of the present day New Democratic Party. It was launched in 1932 with The Regina Manifesto, an explicitly anti-capitalist statement. ken h http://issuu.com/nextyearcountry/docs/ccf1936?mode=embed&layout=http%3A%2F%2Fskin.issuu.com%2Fv%2Fsoftdark%2Flayout.xml&showFlipBtn=true Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu Set your options at: http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Marxism] How MIT Can Honor Aaron Swartz
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/technology/2013/01/aaron_swartz_jstor_mit_can_honor_the_internet_activist_by_fighting_to_make.html Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu Set your options at: http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Marxism] Jim Zarichny introduces himself to Marxmail on July 11, 2003
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == In a separate posting, I will write about the conclusions about the Civil War reached by a study group in 1958-59. Since a number of people have mentioned that they would like to know a little of the background of the writers, here goes. I have been politically active for 67 years, so it is impossible now to discuss all of the political developments I have been involved with. For example, in 1947 or 1948 I was the first and only witness before the Michigan State Senate Committee on un-American Activities. This resulted in a defeat for the Committee and its chairperson,State Sen. Mathew Callahan, failed re-election in the Republican primary. Earlier, I had been placed on disciplinary probation by Michigan State University for passing out leaflets for an organization called American Youth for Democracy. As a returned war veteran, I didn't know I needed permission to pass out leaflets on campus. In 1948 (or 49) I was expelled from Michigan State University. The local newspaper ran a story saying that I attended a meeting off campus at which Carl Winter spoke. The University deemed this a violation of my probation. Carl Winter was the secretary of the Michigan CP and under a Smith Act indictment at the time. The Civil Rights Congress, with the very active participation of Coleman Young (who later became mayor of Detroit) organized a defense committee for me. Among the people who lent their names to my defense committee were Paul Robeson, WEB Dubois, and Congressman Vito Marcantonio. The Civil Rights Congress organized a national speaking tour for me. When the case was appealed to the US Supreme Court, they refused to hear it. About that time, the people around William Z Foster were organizing a drive to get their supporters into industry. Just a few years earlier, under the influence of Earl Browder, his organization had attracted a huge number of students and middle class people. I have heard an estimate, which I believe is accurate, that about 10,000 people went into industry. I went to work in the Chevrolet plant in my hometown, Flint, Michigan. (In junior high school, I had been president of the Junior Union, and in senior high school, I had been secretary treasurer of the CIO Youth Club) By 1950, the UAW was quite depoliticized. Out of 10,000 members, only 2000 voted in Chevrolet union elections. After the Korean War broke out, most of the UAW politicians were afraid to work with us. So we had to run our own slate with just ourselves and our close friends. But we got 500 votes on a CP slate (twenty five percent of the votes cast). We felt this was pretty good in the middle of the hysteria around the Rosenbergs and the Korean War. A few years later, the Army-McCarthy hearings were taking place in Washington. At exactly the same time, the House un-American Activities Committee came to Flint. I was subpoenaed, but never called to testify. However, a number of the witnesses were asked about me, and this was reported in the local paper. At that time, the Chevrolet factory had hired a large number of new workers. All of them were Korean War veterans, and almost all of them were from out of town. Somebody made the claim to these guys that I had supported the North Koreans who had killed their buddies in Korea. One of them implied to me that the source was the FBI. I was attacked by the veterans and badly beaten. Others who were named in the HUAC hearings were also beaten. (The beatings were widely reported state wide by all of the major newspapers. Much to my amazement, the officials of the Ford Motor Company ran a full page ad in the Detroit Free Press deploring violence.) Chevrolet told me that if I did not return to work, I would be fired, but they offered no protection on the streets outside their plant. I returned to work. After several days, I learned that a new attack was coming. I left the plant early, but Chevrolet fired me for leaving without permission. The local union filed a grievance on my behalf. Because Chevrolet refused to settle, it went to a higher level where it was dropped by the Reuther officialdom. In 1956, the Khrushchev report to the 20th Congress of the CPSU confirmed my worst fears. I knew that a fresh start was needed. My friends in Flint were too demoralized to do anything. New York seemed to be the place where I could find people for the project. In New York, I found a job and became a part time student in the Columbia University School of General Studies. In 1958, about 20 young people centered around Steve Max and Jim Brook left YSA to join an almost dying study group that I was involved with. For more than a year we met in my apartment every Wednesday e
[Marxism] Jim Zarichny is dead
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == I just checked. Jim was still subbed to Marxmail but with the "nomail" option. He was really great. Even though he was subbed, he preferred to send posts for me to forward to the list. I include one beneath the obit. http://www.dailycamera.com/news/boulder/ci_22495329/boulder-activist-jim-zarichny-89-dies-before-bookstore?source=pkg Boulder activist Jim Zarichny, 89, dies before bookstore announces closure By Alex Burness Camera Staff Writer Jim Zarichny, an activist in the Democratic Socialist movement, died of various ailments Thursday morning in his south Boulder home. He was 89. Known for his long white beard and commitment to social change, Zarichny died just hours before Left Hand Book Collective -- the progressive Boulder bookstore he helped found -- announced its closure. An activist from a young age, Zarichny was president of his Flint, Mich., high school's junior union and participated with his parents in the 1937 Flint Sit-Down Strike of General Motors. As a college student, Zarichny was an outspoken communist and was the subject of McCarthyist accusations during his time at what is now called Michigan State University. In 1948, he appeared before the Michigan Senate Committee on Un-American Activities at Universities. He refused to tell State Sen. Matthew Callahan whether he was a communist, and he was sentenced to jail for the remainder of the Senate term. But the term ended the same day he was sentenced, so Zarichny never spent a night in jail. Zarichny finished his undergraduate degree in mathematics at Columbia University in New York. After graduating, he was hired by IBM, though the company fired him soon after a background check revealed his communist tendencies. During World War II, Zarichny was trained to be a military police officer in the U.S. Army. He was reassigned to a military hospital in Lido, India, where he admitted injured Chinese soldiers. During his time off, Zarichny traveled throughout India, relishing his conversations with locals. In Boulder, Zarichny worked in supercomputing at the National Center for Atmospheric Research. He was employed by Florida State University, but the school sent him to NCAR because it didn't have a supercomputer. In 1964, he was invited to attend the Pine Hill convention of Students for a Democratic Society. He was also an active member in the Boulder chapter of the New American Movement, a Democratic Socialist group founded in 1971. In 1979, Zarichny hatched the idea for the Left Hand Book Collective, a source for progressive literature. His passion for activism carried well into his old age, as he appeared at Left Hand forums and, as an 87-year-old, marched in the Louisville Labor Day Parade. During his last few years, Zarichny devoted much of his time to sorting through his personal archives, which will soon be available at the University of Colorado's Norlin Library. "He was an incredibly intelligent and very sweet person," said friend and Left Hand volunteer Dave Anderson, who first met Zarichny at a Marxist study group in 1974. "He was always helping out in social movements and always concerned with what was going on in the world and how it make it a better place." Kathy Partridge, who met Zarichny through the New American Movement and has also volunteered at Left Hand, recalls his love of conversation and debate. "He was known to say, 'I am prepared to argue this item at length.' If you were on the other side of the issue, you'd just say, 'uh oh,'" she said with a laugh, adding that Zarichny "was deeply committed to a life of ideas and social justice. "From Jim I learned that social change is a long path," she said. --- Gmane Picon Gravatar From: Louis Proyect panix.com> Subject: Forwarded from Jim Zarichny Newsgroups: gmane.politics.marxism.marxmail Date: 2003-03-26 23:16:15 GMT (9 years, 44 weeks, 5 days, 8 hours and 47 minutes ago) (Jim is a veteran trade union activist and socialist.) On New Years Eve at the end of 1945, some American soldiers on the island of Okinawa mutinied. They had fought in the jungle islands of the South Pacific for almost four years, and they desperately wanted to go home. After all, it was four and a half months since the war ended. But there was no sign of a ship to take them home. The American army was still racially segregated. It was an all white unit. At that time, liquor was not available thru regular channels. Sailors of the merchant marine did a thriving business selling bootleg liquor at inflated prices. The men of that unit bought a lot for New Year's Eve. As they drank, their bitterness came to the surface and they went on a rampage thru the officers' quarters. The officers panicked and fled. Fresh soldiers had recently arrived on the island. They were
[Marxism] MRZine disinformation
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == If you go to Yoshie's blog (misnamed Monthly Review since none of the editors except perhaps the ineffable John Mage seem to embrace it), you will see a link a Youtube video about "rebel lunatics" shooting at a "civilian" Boeing 747 making a landing at the Damascus airport. This is perhaps the most disgusting item seen on this disgusting personal blog since the Arab Spring began, and since it became transformed totally into an outlet for al-Assad. The Youtube link had a disclaimer "The following content has been identified by the YouTube community as being potentially offensive or inappropriate. Viewer discretion is advised." I wondered why. So after googling "Boeing 747 fired upon Syria", I found this: http://www.nycaviation.com/2013/02/video-syrian-fighters-shooting-at-an-airliner-nycaviation-investigates/#.UQ0WRujZqSs The aircraft has no sizable titles on it, which means it is somewhat unlikely to be a operated by a regular airline. So just with the video research, this would likely be a cargo aircraft or an Air Force aircraft. With these facts out of the way, we can start doing some research. Back to the internet, we began hunting for Classic 747s in that area of the world and beyond. Though likely candidates were found early, the search went through thousands of different airframes, with one particular “company” catching our eye. The Iranian Air Force is known to have at least four Classic 747s that are painted with a blue cheatline, blue tail, white top and blue bottom, with no printed titles. One of them, a 747-100 registered EP-AJT, was seen flying in Tehran, Iran just a few weeks ago on January 11th. Formerly registered 5-8101 seen here, the aircraft sports the exact scheme as in the video. It also has a bump just above the nose, which was intended to be used for mid-air refueling, which seems to be visible in the grainy video as well. This, and minor details on their three other 747s, leads us to believe it is this specific airframe. It is also no secret that Iran has been supplying various forms of aid to Syria during their time of civil unrest (to put it lightly). Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu Set your options at: http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] Paul Le Blanc on the SWP crisis
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == On 2/02/13 8:01 PM, "Ratbag Media" wrote: > How do you KNOW, Omar, that this was the case? > Corey's potted history of the Socialist Alliance, as part of his article on where to for the far left today, is a lot more accurate than that of most critics. But not unproblematic and it pretty much stops at 2005 since when there's been considerable development, and regrowth after crises of 2005-08. I won't go into the gory details I posted at Corey's posting of this article at http://www.facebook.com/tomjoad1917 But I'll repeat the positive conclusion: Socialist Alliance and Socialist Alternative are converging on ideas on organisation and program, albeit from different directions, and hopefully will continue to do so. Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu Set your options at: http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] Paul Le Blanc on the SWP crisis
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == I'm sorry but I can't leave this comment go unchallenged: Omar Hassan WROTE: Because the "Socialist Alliance project failed to live up to the expectation..., a considerable number of people (including a number who had been regalvanised in the initial phase of the Alliance) were lost to socialist politics." How do you KNOW, Omar, that this was the case? A "considerable number of people" were lost? Do you know their names so we can check your assertion that they " were lost to socialist politics". If they had been 'lost', how do you know who they were since you were never in the Alliance. Similarly if they had been thereafter 'lost' , would they all have joined Socialist Alternative rather than suffer further lostness? Since I was among those who were "regalvanised in the initial phase of the Alliance" I've aways been considerate of any subsequent membership loss and demoralization. And since I knew many non aligned SA members personally I'm more than a bit wary of your assertion as I can NAME many of those who subsequently left and WHO may not be active today. Loss? Surely. Over a ten year period especially in the wake of the return to Laborism after the demise of the Your Rights at Work Campaign and the exit of the Marxist affiliates such as the ISO and sundries. But a 'considerable number'? How many is that? Tragically a major loss to activist socialist politics over this period wasn't necessarily inside the Alliance itself, but among those who exited the DSP in the split that formed the RSP and the membership loss that flowed from the implosion of the International Socialist Organization (the local IST affiliate). It is easy to quantify how many left the DSP at the time to form the RSP-- but how many of these recently joined Socialist Alternative? My hope is that the RSP's recent fusion with Socialist Alternative may "regalvanise" some of them who have dropped out . dave riley Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu Set your options at: http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Marxism] Saturday's socialist speak out
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == Parliamentarians are about running capitalism, a ruthless dog eat dog society of brutal competition to claw one?s way to the top and ?earn? more profits. Parliamentarians fiddling travel or corruptly enriching themselves are a reflection of the outcome of capitalist competition ? the more dollars you have the better. http://enpassant.com.au/2013/02/02/saturdays-socialist-speak-out-75/ Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu Set your options at: http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
