Re: [Marxism] What is a Proxy War? | Darth Nader
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == I agree. However, the "proxy" need not be limited to ideological or capitalist/socialist conflicts. The war in Syria seems to be a religious one between the Sunnis and |Shia, which makes the choosing of sides by the U.S. particularly stupid. From: Marv Gandall To: alnh...@yahoo.com Sent: Sunday, June 16, 2013 10:02 AM Subject: Re: [Marxism] What is a Proxy War? | Darth Nader On 2013-06-16, at 9:44 AM, Allan Harris wrote: > A proxy war has sometimes been compared to Vietnam and Korea. Both countries > were "proxies" for the U.S. (South V. and South K.) and the Soviet Union and > China. > > The Syrian government would be the proxy for Russia and Iran, the Syrian > rebels would be the proxies for the U.S. > > On 2013-06-15, at 11:30 PM, Louis Proyect wrote: > >> What is a Proxy War? >> Posted by DarthNader ⋅ April 13, 2013 ⋅ 2 Comments >> >> Is what’s happening in Syria today a revolution, a civil war or a proxy war? The reference to a "proxy" war obscures, often deliberately so, the deeper revolutionary character of these mass struggles. It also blurs the very important differences between the socialist-led struggles of yesteryear and today's Islamist-led movements. The Vietnamese, North Korean, and other movements were consciously anticapitalist and and overturned existing property relations during and following the conquest of power. The populist Islamist-led movements, beginning with Iran, have been more deformed ideologically and have nowhere aimed at, much less, completed the same fundamental social transformations. How dependent on outside support were the indigenous socialist and Islamist revolutionary movements in each instance is a matter of conjecture. But again that shouldn't obscure the consequential differences flowing from the fact that the left-wing movements received assistance from comparable anticapitalist regimes, ie. the USSR and China, while the Islamists, except in the case of Iran, have been mainly dependent on aid from the Western powers and Gulf states. 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] What is a Proxy War? | Darth Nader
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == A proxy war has sometimes been compared to Vietnam and Korea. Both countries were "proxies" for the U.S. (South V. and South K.) and the Soviet Union and China. The Syrian government would be the proxy for Russia and Iran, the Syrian rebels would be the proxies for the U.S. From: Marv Gandall To: alnh...@yahoo.com Sent: Sunday, June 16, 2013 7:27 AM Subject: Re: [Marxism] What is a Proxy War? | Darth Nader On 2013-06-15, at 11:30 PM, Louis Proyect wrote: > What is a Proxy War? > Posted by DarthNader ⋅ April 13, 2013 ⋅ 2 Comments > > Is what’s happening in Syria today a revolution, a civil war or a proxy war? Robert Fisk is reporting in today's Independent that Iran is sending 4000 troops to Syria. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/iran-to-send-4000-troops-to-aid-president-assad-forces-in-syria-8660358.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] Los Angeles Review of Books - "Behind The Candelabra" And The Queerness Of Liberace
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == Most big-budget films with leading gay characters are almost exclusively about sex, and more particularly about the suffering of the principals. There may be a kind of cultural law that until an oppressed group attains freedom the artistic representation of them will remain as a group. Womens' films were about women as women struggling for freedom until maybe the mid 70s, there were blacks as only civil rights figures, etc. 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] The Merchants of Shame » CounterPunch: Tells the Facts, Names the Names
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == how do you clip extraneous text without deleting the entire email? 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] Terry Eagleton says we’ve forgotten how to read. Does it matter? - The Globe and Mail
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == - Original Message - From: Daniel Lindvall To: alnh...@yahoo.com Cc: Sent: Saturday, June 1, 2013 10:18 AM Subject: Re: [Marxism] Terry Eagleton says we’ve forgotten how to read. Does it matter? - The Globe and Mail == Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == So really, where is the objectively forcing argument for preferring a brand of malt whiskey to any other or, for that matter, to any other drink that is neither better or worse for your health? Near-consensus among the expertise? We'd all be economic liberals in that case. Hopefully the book is less crude than the review makes one believe. Website: http://filmint.nu/ Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/FilmInt Twitter: https://twitter.com/#!/FilmInt I think Eagleton is saying that taste is a skill, like reading or drinking whiskey; it has to be learned, it is an "acquired taste." A skill has to be taught, which requires a teacher, which means that taste (at least in a literary sense) is a socially acquired skill. If a particular skill, however, is associated with economic and class power then it should not be surprising that teaching that skill is highly controlled by those in power. With very few exceptions only neo-liberal, neo-classical economics is taught in school, esp in the U.S. The appreciation for malt whiskey is either irrelevant or a perfectly permissible bourgeois-approved practice. Economics, class, sex, imperialism, etc. are definitely off limits and can only be taught (and thus denied) by those either approved by the bourgeoisie or by those who are effectively inaudible. Thus, the preference for neo-liberalism is determined by, as you say, a near-consensus of the approved expertise. We may not all be economic liberals, but the dominant economics is liberalism. Taste is, I would say, socially acquired. The taste for economic liberalism is also socially acquired, whereas Marxist economics is strictly socially prohibited, except possibly for the self-taught. 1 jun 2013 kl. 16:34 skrev Louis Proyect: > == > Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. > == > > > http://www.theglobeandmail.com/arts/books-and-media/book-reviews/a-major-critic-says-weve-forgotten-how-to-read-does-it-matter/article12128764/ > > > Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu > Set your options at: > http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/daniel.lindvall%40filmint.nu Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu Set your options at: http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/alnhrs2%40yahoo.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
