Re: [Marxism] Fwd: Louay Hussein, mainstay of Syria opposition, flees to Turkey - FT.com

[Jeff via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*


>http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/4a223334-eda8-11e4-987e-00144feab7de.html

This was behind a paywall, but I found the corresponding report on BBC. The
Financial Times headline repeated in the subject line may have been a bit
misleading. He was among the legal "non-violent" opposition still tolerated
by the regime, but as the article mentions he was still facing prosecution
and felt in danger (presumably that he would be convicted of the
thought-crime and imprisoned; he fled right before the verdict was to be
announced). He had been prepared to attend the (pointless) talks in Moscow
earlier this month, but the regime wouldn't even allow him to travel that
far. So I suspect he figured they were preparing to imprison him and got
out just in time. Things are really coming to a head in Syria, which this
person's departure may be a further sign of.
- Jeff 


http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-32479269

Syrian dissident Louay Hussein flees to Spain
27 April 2015

A prominent Syrian political activist has evaded a travel ban and fled to
Spain before the end of his trial for "weakening national sentiment".

Louay Hussein, head of the Building the Syrian State (BSS) party, said he
had felt that his life was in danger.

The 55-year-old was a leading member of Syria's internal opposition, which
is largely tolerated by the government.

But he was detained last year after writing a newspaper article that was
critical of President Bashar al-Assad.

In February, he was released on bail and banned from leaving the country.


'Difficult journey'

Mr Hussein arrived in Spain on Sunday after what he called "a difficult
journey".

The deputy leader of the BSS, Anas Judeh, said he had flown from Damascus
to the north-eastern city of Qamishli before heading to the nearby town of
Ras al-Ain and crossing the border with Turkey.

"It's no longer possible to come to an understanding with the regime, which
is turning into a militia," Mr Hussein told the AFP news agency.

He will travel to Istanbul in the coming days to meet members of Syria's
exiled opposition, including the Western-backed National Coalition.

In a post on Facebook, he wrote that he hoped to "agree on a roadmap to
save the country from the regime, the extremist Islamic State group, and
the [al-Qaeda-affiliated] al-Nusra Front".

He was put on trial in February on charges of "weakening national
sentiment" and "weakening the morale of the nation".

The charges arose from an opinion piece he wrote for the pan-Arab newspaper
al-Hayat in June 2014, entitled Syrians Do Not Feel They Need A State.

In the article, Mr Hussein criticised the governments of Mr Assad and his
late father, Hafez, arguing that they had "turned state institutions into
agencies to oppress citizens". He also warned that a "national identity
crisis" meant the Syrian state was in danger of collapsing.

Mr Hussein was detained at the beginning of the uprising against Mr Assad
in March 2011, and also spent several years in prison without trial in the
1980s.

In a separate development on Monday, rebels took over a military base in
the north-western province of Idlib.

The capture of al-Qarmid camp is the latest success for the rebels in
Idlib, where they have now driven government forces out of the provincial
capital and main towns.

At the weekend, a rebel alliance calling itself the Army of Victory - which
includes jihadists from al-Nusra Front - seized Jisr al-Shughour.

Government forces responded by launching air strikes on the town and other
targets in Idlib, killing more than 70 civilians, activists said.
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Calling out .....

[Jeff via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

At 16:31 04-05-15 -0400, A.R. G via Marxism wrote:
>
>The article that Clay wrote appears to suggest that anyone who
>second-guessed US government reports that the Syrian regime committed the
>Ghouta attack is a regime apologist

What is important isn't identifying this or that individual of being a
regime apologist, whether intentionally, unconsciously, or inadvertently.
The problem is that this is the discourse that permeates the left, and that
becomes reflected in the views of leftists who hear the same sort of talk
from almost everyone they speak with, and then go on to repeat that same
bullshit themselves. I can only imagine it is not unlike the millions of
sincere communists during the 1930's who hated Trotsky because he was
without a doubt a counter-revolutionary agent working for the fascists, "as
everyone knows."

But among those who are more equipped to investigate questions of fact
independently and still wind up repeating these lies, I have less sympathy.
And I think that's what irks Clay the most: "opinion-makers" who lack
integrity. Where all the circumstantial evidence (as well as most
subsequently obtained evidence) indicates that the residents of East
Ghoutta (a liberated zone) were gassed by the regime and not by themselves,
the only reason someone would not only explore but write about the most
unlikely (and implausible) possibilities is if they feel extremely
uncomfortable with what they realize is almost certainly true. So this no
longer has to do with journalism, but advocacy, and then coming up with
factual scenarios -- no matter how far-fetched! -- in which the guilty
party is let off the hook. There isn't any other explanation for the race
to such conclusions other than the prejudices of the purported "fact-finders."

During the Vietnam war I don't remember anyone "questioning" whether the US
military poisoned the Vietnamese with agent-orange rather than the other
way around (which would have explained the many thousands of American
troops who were also affected). When arch-bishop Romero and the church
women were murdered in El Salvador, I don't remember anyone on the left
going out of their way to investigate whether that had actually been the
work of the FMLN in order to gain sympathy. Well sure, anything is
possible, but if you're doing honest journalism you don't just write in
detail about every unlikely possibility. Unless you're actually doing
propaganda, and the obvious possibility is too painful to acknowledge.
That's when you have to clutch at any straw, and then, in the cases of the
journalists we're discussing, use your well-earned reputation to put a
cover on what you should (and probably do) know has nothing to do with the
truth.

- Jeff








_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Eulogizing the Baathists?

[Jeff via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

At 09:40 05-05-15 -0400, Louis Proyect via Marxism wrote:
>
>What you don't
seem to grasp is that both Saddam Hussein and Bashar 
>al-Assad were not
quite the secularists you make them out to be. 

You might have added that beyond the de facto political domination by
Alawites, the presidency of Syria is formally limited to being a Muslim.
Which most Syrians are, but that's hardly meets my definition of a "secular
state."

- Jeff



_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Aljazeera Arabic: Should We Kill All Alawites?

[Jeff via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

On Mon, May 11, 2015 20:14, A.R. G via Marxism wrote:
>
> I speak some Arabic, it seemed accurate to me.

Well I don't speak any Arabic but I can count words and time intervals.
And from that alone it was clear that the English subtitles contained much
less than a half of the volume of speech. So at best the subtitles were
paraphrasing the conversation, but as Michael points out the translation
itself was graciously provided by an organization with its own axe to
grind, with a number of probable translation errors (beyond Arabic being
difficult to translate directly).

>He should be fired, that is disgusting and also potentially criminal.

I agree it was disgusting and that ethnic/religious hate is criminal.
According to Wikipedia, Faisal al-Qassem's show is approximately Al
Jazeerra's version of Jerry Springer. I don't think he should be fired for
his speech which is approximately what someone expects when they tune in
to that show (which normally doesn't get translated into English, after
all). Rather I'd say they shouldn't run such a show in the first place (as
I would also say for Jerry Springer), but if such views exist within some
segment of the population you don't solve the problem by just censoring
them from the media. Michael's post was very informative in placing these
views in context and addressing the very real concerns illuminated by this
disturbing exchange.

- Jeff



_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Fwd: Is cosmology having a creative crisis ? – Ross Andersen – Aeon

[Jeff via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

On Wed, May 13, 2015 15:15, Louis Proyect via Marxism wrote:
> http://aeon.co/magazine/science/has-cosmology-run-into-a-creative-crisis/

I haven't read this through but have already seen enough to discount it.
I'm afraid this is another science article which is not by a scientist and
which doesn't present the science (as it would be presented to other
scientists for evaluation), but which is rather a philosopher's impression
around some rather esoteric science that he couldn't reasonably be
expected to understand. So we get a story which is filled with everything
but science. Regretably, the author doesn't seem to appreciate/understand
the scientific method, as revealed by the title. Science doesn't have
anything to do with "creativity" (in the usual sense of that word) but
rather understanding what has aready been "created" by nature.

Even more insulting to science (but surely not intended as an insult by
the author) is his statement "To solve these mysteries, cosmologists must
make guesses about events that are absurdly remote from us. Guth’s theory
of inflation is one such guess."

Wrong. Scientists do not make "guesses," we make HYPOTHESES. Any
hypothesis is an acceptable assertion within science until it is disproven
(as almost all are) after which it is more or less dismissed from
consideration. I included the second sentence in his quote because cosmic
inflation is precisely one such hypothesis that is in the process of being
tested (as he discusses). Although the originator of the theory may well
win a Nobel prize when/if it's confirmed, that doesn't mean that he made a
good guess (as if playing black jack) or that he was "creative" (as if he
were Picasso), but that he was insightful enough to see a *possible*
explanation or "hypothesis."

Science is different from politics, because ALL true scientists want to
see the correct theory win (and the incorrect ones disproved) regardless
of which one they personally preferred. Theories are tested by 1)
Disproving them through experiment; 2) Disproving them on the basis of
inconsistency with more basic accepted science (with the possibiilty that
the current accepted wisdom will be found to have been in error in which
case the rejected hypothesis can be revived); and 3) By Occam's Razor when
two different explanations are equally consistent according to 1 and 2.

That is the real basis of the scientific method, which doesn't appear very
well appreciated or explained in popular articles such as this.

- Jeff


_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Assad's US airforce: Terrified of rebel victories innorth, US again bombs Nusra

[Jeff via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

As usual, we're greatly indebted to Michael for searching out this valuable 
information! The links in his email are a bit difficult to navigate (and 
largely in Arabic) but from one of them I was led to this very illuminating 
article:

Islamist rebel leader walks back rhetoric in first interview with U.S. media
By Roy Gutman and Mousab Alhamadee
McClatchy Foreign Staff May 20, 2015 
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2015/05/20/267327/islamist-rebel-leader-walks-back.html

In the article, this person associated with the Islamic Front seems to be 
saying (if I'm not reading too much into it) that they would favor general 
multiparty elections (in other words a secular state) rather than insisting 
on Sharia law and rule by clerics. On the other hand that further raises the 
question that has been bothering me: would Nusra also accept majority rule 
in such a form? Perhaps there's nothing we can do about it anyway, but I'm 
interested/worried about whether a victory for the revolution will be 
followed not just by a political power struggle (which is a given) but the 
rejection of general elections by a force as strong as al-Nusra which may 
believe that it has acquired the moral authority to govern regardless. What 
do people think?

Related to that issue, the article questions whether such shifts are 
designed to curry favor with the American government given the latter's 
likely role (and likely military intervention, I fear) following the defeat 
of the regime. That isn't my view at all but what I'm more concerned with is 
the question just being asked by such a publication and what it says about 
American ruling class concerns/intentions. And then the same question 
(American stance after a rebel victory) regarding al-Nusra, which they have 
been bombing, essentially in concert with Assad as Michael points out.

Finally, in the second video in the article I linked to, Alloush berates the 
Americans for turning a blind eye to the humanitarian crisis in Ghouta 
specifically. Very interestingly (but less surprising to many of us on this 
list) it's revealed that he "was especially bitter about the U.S. government 
sending him a message in February that asked him to halt rocket attacks on 
Damascus." Whereas on the other hand "Alloush complained that the U.S. 
government didn't even condemn the string of government atrocities."

Uh, whose side is the US on again?

- Jeff



_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Israel uses "dirty bombs"

[Jeff via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

On Tue, June 9, 2015 20:07, Andrew Pollack via Marxism wrote:
>
> Carries out tests outdoors and inside closed area
> http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/.premium-1.660067
>
> They admit using radioactive material, even citing types and amounts.
>
> I leave it to the experts on the list to assess the danger involved.

Well I guess I'm somewhat qualified to answer that question. But first
just to point out that a dirty bomb is a rather lame terrorist threat
which is why one has never been employed (and has no military value which
is why I don't believe Israel or any other state would bother using one).
As the article correctly mentions, its main attractiveness is
psychological, to cause panic, taking advantage of popular fears
associated with radioactivity (which is not at all irrational but is so
non-specific that anything so classified will cause the same concern, as
Andy's reaction is an example of). Setting off a nuclear dirty bomb would
in almost all cases not kill anyone until well after the headlines died
down, and likely wouldn't kill anyone at all if it wasn't set off in an
enclosed area that didn't get evacuated quickly. If someone just wanted to
kill a bunch of random people it would be a lot easier and more effective
to poison the water supply or release anthrax into a ventilation system. I
do believe the Israelis' concern was defensive and just one small aspect
of their overblown security state encouraging anti-Arab paranoia and a
siege mentality among their citizens.

The specific radioisotope used (the quantity wasn't specified) was
technetium 99m, which is widely used in nuclear medicine as a marker which
is injected into a patient for imaging. It is ideal for that purpose
because it has a half-life of only 6 hours, which is also why releasing it
into the open means any risk would rapidly subside.

In other words, if someone is looking for an evil act to pin on Israel,
you could make a very long list without doing much research, and this item
would only appear at the bottom of the list. I'll post the Haaretz article
below for anyone's interest.

- Jeff


Haaretz exclusive: Israel tested 'dirty-bomb cleanup' in the desert

Series of tests in conjunction with four-year project at Dimona nuclear
reactor measured damage and other implications of detonation of
radiological weapon by hostile forces.

By Chaim Levinson   | Jun. 8, 2015 | 12:29 PM

Israel recently carried out a series of tests in the desert in conjunction
with a four-year project at the Dimona nuclear reactor to measure the
damage and other implications of the detonation of a so-called “dirty”
radiological bomb by hostile forces. Such a bomb uses conventional
explosives in addition to radioactive material.

Most of the detonations were carried out in the desert and one was
performed at a closed facility. The research concluded that high-level
radiation was measured at the center of the explosions, with a low level
of dispersal of radiation by particles carried by the wind. Sources at the
reactor said this doesn’t pose a substantial danger beyond the
psychological effect.

An additional concern stems from a radiological explosion in a closed
space, which would then require that the area be closed off for an
extended period until the effects of the radiation are eliminated.

In 2010, staff from the Dimona nuclear reactor began a series of tests,
dubbed the “Green Field” project, designed to measure the consequences of
the detonation of a dirty bomb in Israel. The project was concluded in
2014, and its research findings have been presented at scientific
gatherings and on nuclear science databases. The researchers explained
that the experiments were for defensive purposes and that they were not
giving consideration to offensive aspects of the tests.

Public concern over radiological terrorism began after the terrorist
attacks in the United States on September 11, 2001 and the threat by
representatives of Al-Qaida to use such weaponry against the United
States. The radioactive material is available to the medical and
industrial sectors, and those who threaten its use as a weapon aim to
augment the damage and fear caused by an explosion by adding the threat of
radiation to the mix.

No such device has ever been deployed by terrorists, but officials in
Israel have prepared for such an eventuality. In 2006, the Health Ministry
issued procedures on how to deal with such an event. The website of the
Israel Defense Force’s Home Front Command also features an explanation on
how to proceed if such an event were to occur.

In 2013, Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon issued a warning at a meeting in
Canada in which he said

Re: [Marxism] Israel uses "dirty bombs"

[Jeff via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

At 13:46 09-06-15 -0700, DW via Marxism wrote:
>
>I think one misses the point. Implied in the Haaretz article is that the
>use of harmless technetium in these experiments is necessarily an important
>part in developing dirty bombs.

Well nuclear dirty bombs don't need to be "developed." One would just use
the same explosion that could equally well be used to disperse a chemical
or biological weapon, but filled with a radioactive isotope.

> It's true no modern state has ever
>developed one as they have limited military value.

I would say zero military value. Unless the military objective is to have
enemy soldiers slowly die from cancer over the next months and years.

> However, they do have
>very specific *political* value as a form of terrorism or, should one
>believe in these sorts of things, false-flag operations.

Well if I were a terrorist (which I'm not) or part of a government trying
to pin such an act on terrorists (which I'm definitely not!) it would
suffice to just set off an explosion in a shopping mall. Attached to the
bomb would be a big sign saying that the bomb that just exploded was
extremely radioactive. By the time the site could be thoroughly tested and
declared to be radiation-free, everyone would have long since evacuated the
area. The success of my terrorist operation would be measured by the number
of people who got trampled in the panic or who crashed their cars fleeing
the area. 

- Jeff


>
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] 'Radio Freedom' in Ukraine

[Jeff via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

>From everything I have read from him, the credibility of Roger Annis and his 
pretense to be engaging in actual analysis has been destroyed. For instance: 

At 18:42 14-06-15 -0700, Roger Annis via Marxism wrote:
>
>Russia's "annexation" of Crimea by Russia last year. The Crimean people 
>voted overwhelmingly for secession from Ukraine and federation with Russia 
>in March 2014

This is but one example of the writer starting with a conclusion for which a 
justification must be fabricated. When an election (for instance) is staged 
by a power in which the result of the election and subsequent events have 
already been planned, then the credibility of such an exercise is nil. This 
was as true for the "re-election" of Bashar al-Assad as was it for the 
"succession vote" in Crimea.

In particular, we have since learned that the Russian government had already 
determined the fate of Crimea over a week before the fall of Yanukovych and 
before the brilliant idea of ratifying those actions with a "popular 
election" in the Crimea had been hatched. Recall this incriminating document:

http://www.interpretermag.com/it-is-seen-as-correct-to-initiate-the-annexation-of-the-eastern-regions-of-ukraine-to-russia/

- Jeff


>
>The imperialist countries are continuing their penetration and domination of 
>eastern Europe, destroying Ukraine in the process. They are driving towards 
>war with Russia, including the danger they would unleash nuclear weapons. They 
>are spending a trillion dollars to "modernize" their nuclear arsenal. And 
>Marxism list contributors reply, "But what about Putin?" 



>
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Marxism] Question regarding "consistent" opposition to Western imperialist intervention

[Jeff via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

On Tue, June 16, 2015 17:36, Louis Proyect via Marxism wrote:
>
> This leads to a key question that has been nagging at the left ever
> since NATO intervened in Libya. Do we automatically oppose any armed
> body that is being supported by imperialist intervention?

Well I don't think that's the right question, and I don't think we should
really do anything "automatically," that is, according to a formula
without considering the concrete situation, context and all. Also, there
is a big difference between not opposing something and becoming a party to
it let alone cheerleaders for its instigators.

Sadly, after having posed the question in these mechanical terms, it
appears that Louis' answer is "yes":

> My view is that American intervention should be opposed on a consistent
> basis.

In other words "automatically," if I'm to understand the relationship of
this remark to the previously posed question. (And if my understanding is
wrong, then I think the piece needs to be rewritten for clarification.) I
see a few problems with that. First it makes us all hypocrites because
AFAIK no one on this list or among the Stalinist or pro-Assad left is
actively engaged in opposing what is literally a US air war in Iraq and
Syria over most of the last year. Unless by "oppose" you mean just writing
articles which reach a relative handful (mainly the far left) of people;
this can hardly be called agitation or action. Now, I agree with many of
those articles myself, for instance about how the US intervention may be
causing more harm than good, also targets al-Nusra and other revolutionary
forces, sets a bad precedent, etc. But if I really wanted to "oppose" them
(in the usual sense of the term) then I would be calling them the "enemy"
in regards to their bombing of ISIS and would organize demonstrations
calling upon them to stop hurting poor ISIS. I'm not doing that because I
don't take that position, and judging by their actions no one else on the
left does either.

And among other more abstract objections, let me just point out the
following scenario (which is not at all unlikely) and the consequences of
a formula that is reduced to "American intervention should be opposed on a
consistent basis." Suppose the revolution has defeated the government
leaving a power struggle between "democrats" and "Jihadists" (and perhaps
a another force or two). I would oppose American intervention for obvious
reasons, but it would likely happen anyway. It could well turn out that
the US and we are supporting the same side. I may well argue within the
revolutionary ranks against dependence on or any alliance with the
Americans. But just like with the current US war nominally against ISIS, I
probably wouldn't insist that American military assistance to our side,
whether it's useful or not, has to end. Even if I were representing the
largest left party in the world, I'd be foolish to demand that they have
to choose between support from us or from the Americans -- if I did they
would likely choose the side with the military power for pragmatic
reasons.

Even worse is the original form of Louis' question: "Do we automatically
oppose any armed body that is being supported by imperialist
intervention?" If the answer (as it appears to be) is "yes", then it not
only means that we oppose the imperialist role, but oppose the armed body
(the revolutionaries!) who are being supported by that imperialist
intervention. That literal reading of Louis' post is so absurd that I will
assume he was just sloppy with his wording.

We can do all we want with propaganda and analysis. But when one talks
about "opposing" a reality on the ground which isn't the burning question,
then it can mean sitting on the sidelines of, if not actively sabotaging
the efforts of the revolutionaries we support.

- Jeff


P.S. Also, this caveat is curious:

>If it can be established as a
> "red line" that the American military only be used to defend American
> territory from attack

Now why would I want to give the American (or any) military even that much
legitimacy? If there were a revolution in the US, then according to the
ruling class "American territory" would be under attack (by the armed
workers, surely citing the involvement of some "outside agitators") and
you can bet the military would be used as soon as the normal police proved
insufficient. Thus without crossing the "red line"?





_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Marxism] Counterpunch promoting left-right alliance (aka "Querfront")?

[Jeff via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

On Wed, July 22, 2015 04:43, A.R. G via Marxism wrote:
>
http://azvsas.blogspot.nl/2015/07/counterpunch-time-for-socialists-anti.html

I have changed the subject line of this thread; I, like Sheldon Ranz,
didn't understand or appreciate the tag Amith applied to this weighty
matter.

I attach great importance to the material in Tony Greenstein's blog entry,
and especially the lengthy article by Elise Hendrick which was appended to
that page but can as well be viewed at its original location at:

Counterpunch or Suckerpunch
How ‘America’s Best Political Newsletter’ Mainstreams the Far Right
http://meldungen-aus-dem-exil.noblogs.org/post/2015/07/19/counterpunch-or-suckerpunch/

The thesis of the article is that Counterpunch (which I would have
casually, but perhaps ignorantly, described as a left-wing publication)
contains more articles by authors properly identified with the right than
from the left. And what's more that this is a result of an underlying
philosophy by Counterpunch's editors (including the late Alexander
Cockburn) which seeks a left-right alliance of sorts, as we have seen in a
number of other contexts, also going by the exotic name "Querfront." But
of course there is no material basis for an alliance between the class
forces seeking to overthrow capitalism and its ruling class in favor of a
classless society and those who seek to reverse more modern (and
frequently, but not always, progressive) aspects of the current capitalist
reality: "reactionaries." Thus I would argue, as this author seems to
believe, that what actually occurs in these instances is an intrusion by a
right-wing force into a left-wing movement or milieu for the purpose of
injecting some of their content into a popular (and otherwise legitimate)
cause, to recruit those in and around the left to their ranks (especially
when the rhetoric espoused by both left and right is barely
distinguishable!), and to gain respectability for themselves at our
expense. Examples thereof are quite numerous, but among very current
issues this can be recognized in the draping of the reactionary Russian
government (and Eastern Ukrainian separatists) in the coattails of Lenin
and the Soviet victory over Nazism, and support for the  reactionary Assad
regime in Syria on the basis of its supposed  "anti-imperialism" and
stalwart struggle against Israel.

As rather incriminating evidence of the true nature of Counterpunch, the
author tallied the authorship of Counterpunch articles indexed by Google,
with prominent left and right-wing authors occupying opposite sides of the
ledger. This is detailed in the first table conspicuous in the article: in
it she tallied 245 articles by "left/progressive" authors and 674 by
"right/white supremacist" authors. Personally I found that statistic quite
surprising, and would have expected about the opposite disproportion! But
I guess it's because I only browse Counterpunch when I'm referred to a
link, and thankfully my friends are pretty much all on the left. The
statistic 245:674 seems rather damning, though I should point out that
editor Jeffrey St. Clair posted a sarcastic comment (viewable at the
article's original URL, above) which mentions a number of leftist authors
absent from the Google search, implying that the ratio isn't so bad for
the left at all. But then one again would wonder why even a minority of
featured space in a truly leftist publication would have to be reserved
for the class enemy.

It's probably neither here nor there, but I'll note (as anyone here
looking at Table I would have immediately noticed!) that on the
"left/progressive" side of the article-count ledger, this list's esteemed
moderator garnered the highest publication score. I suppose this could
equally well be construed as him being so savvy as to subvert a largely
right-wing publication with leftist content, or construed as foolishly
giving a "left-cover" to a publication which should be shunned.

But the issue to me isn't Counterpunch magazine in particular, but the
extremely dangerous effects of allowing far-right/racist/nationalist
forces to infiltrate our discourse and our movements, as Counterpunch is
more or less guilty of. And the numerous political errors affecting a
greater or lesser part of the left which can be attributed to the loss of
clarity thereby arising. I'd like to see this matter widely discussed and
addressed by those of us who care about class struggle, rather than simply
being "anti-government," or in today's emerging parlance
"anti-imperialist."

- Jeff







_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options 

Re: [Marxism] Counterpunch promoting left-right alliance (aka "Querfront")?

[Jeff via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

On Wed, July 22, 2015 17:56, Louis Proyect via Marxism wrote:
>
> Now I confess to being many things: obnoxious, sarcastic, narcissistic
> and cruel. But "ex-Marxist"? Really? I'll have more to say about that
> anon.


Fine, but that wasn't an issue in my post, nor was it the point of Tony
Greenstein's post, and Elise Hendrick's article properly put you among the
"left" contributors to Counterpunch. Nor is you personally contributing to
Counterpunch an issue (even though I had to mention it). And as I said, it
is the broader issue of a left-right alliance that needs to be discussed,
Counterpunch's exact role and statistics being a subsidiary matter. Could
we please steer the discussion in that direction and ignore personal
snipes and the like (after all, he never said you weren't a leftist or
couldn't be part of a regroupment, etc.)?

- Jeff

P.S. And I don't care about the email subject line either, but now it's
been changed, ok?

_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Counterpunch promoting left-right alliance (aka"Querfront")?

[Jeff via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

At 01:45 23-07-15 +, Charles Faulkner via Marxism wrote:
>
>the case for cp being a white supremacist/fascist periodical is
overstated..
>
>the weaker claim that cp is diluting its left credentials by providing a 
>forum for the libertarian (that's what i'll call it) right seems worthy of 
>consideration. 

I don't necessarily disagree with those observations, and as I said, it
hadn't ever been my impression that Counterpunch published more from the
right than the left. Except that this article did an apparently honest
article count in which that emerged statistically. Nor has anyone asserted
that it's a "white supremacist/fascist periodical." However the author
presents evidence that Cockburn DID have the conscious orientation of
promoting a right-left alliance (though I trust his underlying intentions
were more left-wing) and that this is reflected in their openness to
accepting material from those who are clearly on the RIGHT but also seek
such an alliance (but intending the opposite outcome). So the practical
issue might be reduced to which side is to gain from such unprincipled
behaviour. I think the answer to that is clear: the side to gain is not the
one based on clarity, self-consciousness, and scientific analysis of
historical development, but rather the side based on emotion and hysteria
(nationalism, racism, homophobia, conspiracy theorism, religion, fear of
modernity). 

The effect of the publication policy in Counterpunch has been documented
quantitatively in the Hendrik article. Some disagreement has been expressed
with regard to those numbers, both by Jeffrey St. Clair as I mentioned
before, and by Ron J. who complained (in the comments section) that he had
400 articles missing from the left-wing side of the statistical comparison.
However despite all that, Counterpunch has to explain why as many as 674
articles were published by "white supremacist authors . including Gilad
Atzmon, Mary Rizzo, Israel Shamir, and Jeff Blankfort, known for their
racist conspiracism and holocaust denial, white nationalist and Reagan-era
US Assistant Secretary of the Treasury Paul Craig Roberts, Alison Weir of
If Americans Knew, Bill and Kathleen Christison, and Franklin Lamb." Even
if there had been many more leftist authors. 674 is too large a number to
chalk up to "mistakes."

Amith's disagreement (in the excerpt below) is much more serious and
strikes at the heart of our difference. I will further reply in a later
post when I have time to write.

- Jeff

At 10:38 23-07-15 +0200, A.R. G via Marxism wrote:
>
>I do not agree with this. Right-libertarians are obviously not "leftist,"
>but how are they any more of a dilution than, say, various liberal voices?
>I doubt anyone is willing to suggest that *The Nation* or *The Guardian* are
>diluting left credentials by running pieces from liberal authors that do
>not engage in class analysis and the like. In fact, when you consider the
>variety of voices that exist and float around on the left, Ron Paulists are
>particularly *good*, if not anti-capitalist. They are the ones who opposed
>the Iraq invasion, the PATRIOT Act, the anti-Muslim mob at Ground Zero,
>etc. Compared to the "Progressive Except Palestine" crowd I'd rather hear
>from them.
>
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Counterpunch promoting left-right alliance (aka "Querfront")?

[Jeff via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

I hadn't paid attention on the first read, but actually this is very
revealing:

On Thu, July 23, 2015 04:15, Dennis Brasky via Marxism wrote:
>
> CP co-editor Joshua Frank replies on my Facebook page -
>
> We publish 100 articles a week, she's singling out 3 writers at most,
> which
> we publish on occasion - of course not all of thprominenteir stuff. For
instance,
> we
> don't run PCR's crazy 9/11 truth theories.

So I found that in fact Paul Craig Roberts has been published on
Counterpunch not just 264 times as Hendrick counted (using a Google
search) but over 650 times in the last 11 years (according to the
Counterpunch site). A recent example is a defense of Vladmir Putin with
whom he surely shares his underlying values:

http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/06/24/when-putin-speaks-in-his-own-words/

Unfortunately talk of this sort will be music to the ears of many -- I
fear most -- on the far left who have been sold the "new cold war"
paradigm and have heard similar sounding analyses from actual leftists.
Except that this is coming from a reactionary who thereby gains
respectability within the left.

BUT, the Counterpunch editor Joshua Frank points out that they certainly
don't run ALL of Paul Craig Roberts' columns! No no. For instance, here
are recent columns that they did NOT run, where he asserts that the US
Civil War was not about slavery but calls it the "War of Northern
Aggression" against the Southerners who were just fighting for their
liberation. And that it's wrong to vilify American police as racist,
because after all, they kill more whites than blacks (!!):

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article42451.htm
http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2015/04/13/power-lies/

But my point wasn't to talk about Paul Craig Roberts, and not even the
fact that he gets published on Counterpunch. Rather that, as their editor
carelessly admits, they AVOID publishing the sorts of articles by the
scumbag which would reveal him as a racist pig, while allowing ones which
typical leftists could more relate to. In other words, the role of
Counterpunch in this regard is to appeal to those on the left and open
them to rightists who are talking in similar terms (already a huge problem
in itself).

So no, I wouldn't at all call Counterpunch a right-wing journal. It is, as
Hendrick and Greenstein have shown, a journal which uses its left-wing
appearance to expose its left-leaning readership to the portion of the far
right which seeks a hearing among (and an unprincipled alliance with) the
left. Of course Counterpunch has got a lot of great (left wing) content as
well. But this role as a conveyer belt for the right to reach the left --
while carefully sanitizing any material that would be counterproductive in
that regard! -- is despicable and should be denounced.

Previously I had shrugged off the presence of right wing writers on what I
saw as a prominent leftist journal as an abberation or a one-off. Now I
see that it's systematic. I applaud Elise Hendrick for having confronted
this abomination.

- Jeff




_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Fwd: In defense of Counterpunch | Louis Proyect: The Unrepentant Marxist

[Jeff via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

At 15:54 24-07-15 -0400, Louis Proyect via Marxism wrote:
>
http://louisproyect.org/2015/07/24/in-defense-of-counterpunch/

This is just unbelievable. Louis' reaction to an honest (and I believe
accurate) evaluation of Counterpunch must fit the classical pattern of
denial; anyone will be able to see that except, of course, the subject. I
recall so many times him complaining about the reactionary content on
Counterpunch, incredulous that a nominally left-wing newsletter/website
would be open to such anti-revolutionary crap. I didn't pay too much
attention nor did I pay too much attention when he ceased from that sort of
criticism. But now come to think of it, that was at about the time that the
Counterpunch editors, rather than defending their editorial policy, wisely
granted him carte blanche to post his own material on the site. Which I was
usually glad to see appear there, but of course it doesn't undo the damage
caused by the right-wing inspired material also present; now I can see that
his participation arguably lent legitimacy to Counterpunch as a left-wing
outfit while barely changing the proportion of right-wing content
(disguised as "anti-imperialist", anti-liberal, libertarian, skeptical,
etc.). And more egregiously it managed to transform him into part of the
problem.

It's not unlike the scenario where a long-time member of a stalinist (or
"stalinistic", y'know) party gets expelled for "disloyalty." And then is
finally given a chance to rejoin and redeem himself. Of course he now
proves his loyalty to the max by denouncing other "disloyal" members. I
can't hate that person; it's just sad. Sad.

And

At 14:47 24-07-15 -0700, Ken Hiebert via Marxism wrote:
>
>For whatever reason (perhaps lack of computer skills on my part) I could 
>not comment on the CP site, so I am commenting here.

Ha. nothing wrong with your computer skills Ken. I tried to comment
too, but it seems that commenting was disabled for this particular post.
Funny thing though: Louis always used to complain about the Counterpunch
site not allowing comments! Unlike MOST left websites where we value
discourse and democracy, Counterpunch disallows that. I guess it would be
too embarrassing if someone like Paul Craig Roberts could be challenged by
ordinary readers. So now all of a sudden Louis' blogpost has been set to
"read-only." Figures. :-(

- Jeff










_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Fwd: In defense of Counterpunch | Louis Proyect: The Unrepentant Marxist

[Jeff via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

At 18:35 24-07-15 -0400, Louis Proyect via Marxism wrote:
>
>Jeff, you are a trained scientist. Can you take those statistics 
>seriously?

No, and I know for a fact that the author isn't very comfortable with those
statistics (the left vs. right article count) either but it was the best
she could do (I learned first-hand how hard it was to accurately query the
Counterpunch site by author in order to get such figures) and was an honest
attempt to quantify the problem. She worked yet harder to look through
articles for their attitudes toward Ron Paul, Gilad Atzmon, and the
"Israeli lobby controls American foreign policy" line (in the other
tables). If someone believes that she intentionally biased the results
(so-called "cherry-picking") then they should repeat the exercise and
report their figures.

But you're missing one important point here:

> someone who is not a regular reader would conclude that 
>rightwing articles outnumber those of the left.

If they thought Counterpunch had published less than 1000 articles total
they might have thought that. Otherwise they'd realize that this was a
sample of some prominent rightists vs. leftists but a small minority of the
total publication. A lot of the articles on Counterpunch aren't even
political enough to classify and aren't by known figures. But the main
statistic that I think DOES need to be heeded is that she identified 674
(but given an updated count, actually over 1000) articles written by
infamous figures who should NEVER appear ONCE on a truly left wing
publication (except possibly with a disclaimer in order to illustrate what
the enemy is saying).

No, the claim isn't that right wing articles outnumber the legitimate
articles, but that there is a systematic attempt to inject such material
and especially that this corresponds to the "Querfront" strategy of the
right where they attempt to garner left support for their own purposes.
Like the German fascists wisely calling themselves "National Socialists" to
gain the legitimacy conferred by the latter term, and countless other
examples. 

- Jeff
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Fwd: In defense of Counterpunch | Louis Proyect: The Unrepentant Marxist

[Jeff via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

At 19:10 24-07-15 -0400, Louis Proyect via Marxism wrote:
> her 
>choice of rightists is questionable. As I pointed out, Paul Larudee and 
>Franklin Lamb are Baathist propagandists, not conservative or 
>libertarian ideologues.

Hmmm, you just made me realize that I have no idea whether those
individuals are right or left. AFAIK they only address middle-east issues
in ways which are common to some leftists (sadly) but also rightists (both
properly defining the Syrian and Iranian regimes as right-wing, and also
noting the prominent transformation of yesteryear's far-right antisemites
into more respectable "anti-zionists" following a literal stroke of
genius). So I'm wondering: have YOU (or anyone else on this list) seen
other writings by either of these two where they deal clearly with class
issues that would place them on the right or left? My general rule, as when
I looked through the website of that eastern-Ukrainian pro-Russian party
that erroneously had "socialist" in its name, is that if you can write
volumes yet never once speak about clearly left-wing concerns (the
interests of the working class and labor issues, fighting sexism and the
patriarchy, opposing nationalism with international solidarity, etc.) then
I have no reason to call you a leftist. But again, I won't rush to
judgement about these two

> They write the same kind of junk as Tony 
>Greenstein

Except Tony Greenstein is a COMMUNIST and could well be a member of this
list! Yes, it's sad that some communists would write about Syria in the
same terms as the rightists -- we've all been struggling with that. But
it's a totally different struggle against the ENEMY which supports Assad
BECAUSE he's a fascist. I don't know whether Franklin Lamb and Paul Larudee
fall in that category, but I'd sure want to find out before I entered into
"comradely" discussion with them. Wouldn't you? 

- Jeff




_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Marxism] Being (with Counterpunch) determines consciousness (about Counterpunch)

[Jeff via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

The recent analysis of Counterpunch by Elise Hendrick provoked on the part of 
our list moderator a rather unexpected rush to the defense of Counterpunch and 
moreover a strong denial of its role in blurring distinctions between right and 
left, and acting as a conduit of right-wing ideology into the left, of course 
disguised using a common (and thus imprecise) vocabulary. I wrote from my 
general memory that his attitude toward Counterpunch had changed substantially 
over the years I had been subscribed to the list, speculating whether this 
might have had to with his elevation to a regular writer for the 
website/journal. He denied any such reversal:

At 18:42 24-07-15 -0400, Louis Proyect wrote:
>Also, I am surprised that any long-time subscriber to Marxmail could 
>conclude that I did a 180 degree reversal on CounterPunch just because I 
>would write articles bashing Alexander Cockburn from time to time. 

Well it seemed to me that it went beyond the personality of Cockburn, unless 
one is to assume that Cockburn was an absolute dictator that had one editorial 
policy but that editorial policy changed completely after his death. Surely no 
one else has noticed a drastic shift in Counterpunch around that time 
(mid-2012). But I took Louis' challenge to search the Marxmail list archives 
(but using my own email records which only cover 2009-2015) and was led to a 
conclusion much stronger than I had possibly expected!

For reasons of practicality I restricted myself to posts by Louis in which 
"Counterpunch" appeared in the subject line; this therefore ignores many if not 
most messages where Counterpunch editorial policy was discussed. To get a 
count, I scanned messages to see if they were explicitly favorable to 
Counterpunch (including complementing Counterpunch for publishing something) or 
were unfavorable to Counterpunch (including criticizing Counterpunch for its 
editorial decision or criticizing a piece contributed by a lead editor such as 
Cockburn). Yes, I'm afraid my manual intervention means that the charge of 
subjectivity cannot be ruled out, but I'm pretty sure that anyone who checks 
entries on the list below will have to agree with my classification in most, 
probably all cases. The many articles where Louis' attitude toward Counterpunch 
wasn't clear (or where there was no hint of an issue, just a reference to a 
Counterpunch article for its content) were not included in either category.
 Multiple messages in the same thread have been removed from the following 
list. 

I found 14 messages in which Louis takes an "anti-Counterpunch" position. And 
13 in which Louis takes a "pro-Counterpunch" position. I was expecting to see a 
clear trend of the pro messages being posted at later dates than the anti 
messages, which, would probably be convincing enough (without resorting to 
statistical tests) to confirm my initial conjecture. But what I found was much 
more damning! All but one of the anti messages were from BEFORE October 2012, 
and all of the pro messages were from AFTER that date!! 

Americans note: date format is day/month/year

Anti:
17:31 10/09/09 Re: [Marxism] J. Mackler replies to A. Cockburn/CounterPunch
11:24 04/01/10 [Marxism] More idiocy at Counterpunch
17:42 18/05/10 Re: [Marxism] Counterpunch: labor should ally with fascists
11:36 15/04/11 [Marxism] Rancid reporting from Counterpunch
12:15 19/05/11 [Marxism] Counterpunch fave defends DSK
10:24 04/08/11 [Marxism] Counterpunch joins the pro-Assad brigades
12:35 01/09/11 [Marxism] What is Robert Bryce doing on Counterpunch?
12:18 05/09/11 [Marxism] Latest from Counterpunch on Syria
09:28 17/02/12 [Marxism] MRZine joins Counterpunch in backing the trick-or-tre
12:07 25-05-12  [Marxism] Counterpunch defends Black Bloc and Qaddafi,
14:21 15-06-12  [Marxism] Counterpunch: FAZ muddied the waters
12:30 01-08-12  [Marxism] Shitty Counterpunch article on Syria
09:23 17-08-12  [Marxism] Counterpunch, Chris Ray, Syria and Oman
14:27 20-08-12  [Marxism] Counterpunch recirculates ANC/SACP talking points
22:16 21-02-15  Re: [Marxism] counterpunch attacks Brown Moses,

Pro:
13:45 18-10-12  [Marxism] Why you should contribute to Counterpunch
11:35 17-05-13  Re: [Marxism] Counterpunch at a new sexist low, still digging
08:35 25-05-13  Re: [Marxism] bluff, bluster, and bullshit at CounterPunch
15:36 13-07-13  Re: [Marxism] Help Defend Jacobin / CounterPunch and the War on
18:29 23-07-13  Re: [Marxism] wither Counterpunch?
14:42 08-11-13  [Marxism] Make a contribution to Counterpunch
15:02 20-12-13  [Marxism] Counterpunch
15:06 01-03-14  Re: [Marxism] Another example of why I consider Counterpunch
07:41 13-03-14  [Marxism] N

Re: [Marxism] The Council for the National Interest

[Jeff via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

At 01:36 31-07-15 +0200, A.R. G via Marxism wrote:
>
> CNI is an
organization of mostly
>diplomats and former governmental
personnel..
>former ambassador to Iraq . He was also in the CIA,

I can't believe I'm reading this! Does anyone think that because these
members of the ruling class (who also function in its state) left their
positions they somehow became part of the left?? That may have been the
case for Ramsey Clark, but in almost all other cases (for someone in a
similarly high position) they surely retain their class loyalty. If
anything, they shift to the right, now that they no longer have
responsibilities requiring an aura of respectability (like Paul Craig
Roberts defending the Confederacy of the American South, a disruputed
attitude now within respectable ruling class circles, its racist flag now
being removed from some government buildings etc.). I can't imagine why
anyone on the left would want to whitewash this sort of trash. Nor could I
think of a worse way of tarnishing the Palestinian resistance than hooking
them up with the antisemitic extreme right. I'll have more to say on this
later
- Jeff


_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] The Council for the National Interest

[Jeff via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

At 20:10 30-07-15 -0400, Louis Proyect via Marxism wrote:
>that reach millions of people. We should be happy that there are a 
>number of prominent people including Mearsheimer and Walt who have the 
>guts to denounce the Zionist project even if it is from a "narrow" 
>perspective. The Palestinians benefit from their support much more than 
>they do from tiny Marxist groups that have great politics but zero 
>influence.

Whenever someone speaks the truth, the oppressed benefit. When a government
official gets pissed off and gets themselves in trouble telling the truth,
of course that's good. It's even better for them to tell the truth when
they are put on trial. 

But my point was that the Palestinians in particular benefit much more from
the US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation and Jewish Voice for Peace
because those groups are on the left MEANING that their motivation is
solidarity with the Palestinians, and not antisemitism (or more benignly
"promoting our national interests"). That means they are doing it for the
right reason and with the right message, even where we might find
disagreements. And these groups DO have considerable influence, as does
Noam Chomsky who also is a leftist thus pro-Palestinian. His message is
preferable to that of pro-Arab James Abourezk who is himself far preferable
to the right-wing trash who are amazingly being lauded simply because they
hate Israel and have "influence." 

- Jeff


_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] The Council for the National Interest

[Jeff via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

At 01:30 31-07-15 -0400, Louis Proyect via Marxism wrote:
>
>Nothing on abortion rights either. Sexist pigs if you ask me.

Actually, yes. I have no doubt that if you went through the membership list
(if any, otherwise a list of their funders) you will find extreme
anti-choice activists. They are all part of the same far-right crowd which
is why I find it incredible that there would even be a serious discussion
on this list about one of their front groups. Of course this particular
front has a nominally single-issue orientation, but I would never have
expected sophisticated Marxists to be so easily fooled by (or blind to)
window dressing:

"Working for Middle East policies that serve the American national interest" 

That's their supposed focus, but if you go through their articles, every
single one is about Israel or indirectly about Israel in terms of an issue
critical to Israel such as the US-Iran deal. It has nothing about the bulk
the middle east, a rather large geographical area. So their raison d'etre
is already a lie. In particular, the main victims of Israel, Palestinians,
are only mentioned when convenient for making a claim against Israel, but
no one (right, left, or other) believes that promoting the interests of
Palestine would "serve the American national interest." 

But one of their 6 selections on their website's sidebar of "Commentary
&Analysis Categories" is called "Israeli & Jewish Press." I can barely
point to any "Jewish Press" outside of Israel and that isn't what they're
talking about either. This is a reference to the mainstream press and the
notion that it's controlled by "Jews" as is Hollywood. And this is why
their anti-Israeli politics has nothing to do with the interests of the
Palestinians: it's an expression of antisemitism. Period. 

- Jeff

 





It isn't clear to me whether 

_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] The Council for the National Interest

[Jeff via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

At 12:28 31-07-15 +0200, A.R. G via Marxism wrote:
>
>Jeff has done a great
job finding a fascist conspiracy, so I'd like to
>point out another one.

How come the last 3 posts on the subject from Amith and Louis are sarcastic
remarks involving straw-men? And the ones before that also avoided the
issues by focussing on personalities who I never had directly attacked such
as James Abourezk (a liberal politician -- so what?) and " Iyad Burnat, the
head of the Bi'lin Popular
Committee" whose only guilt is signing a petition in error? You can't
counter my claims by denying claims I never made, and the point of doing so
can only be to distract the reader and make light of an extremely serious
issue. 

As far as what Amith did post about Bernie Sanders, sarcastically, a lot of
it is true and is why I wouldn't support him. But please post that as a new
thread and it can be taken seriously as a separate discussion. As far as
this discussion related to the far right (no "conspiracy" involved, just
the normal misuse of language), I'd like to see some actual content.

Or if the view actually is that we should unite with antisemites in order
to best bring down Israel in the interests of the Palestinians, then just
SAY THAT. At least that would be a left-wing position, not a tactic I'd
support, but at least it would be within the parameters of discussion I'd
expect on this list. Covering up for the far-right is not.

- Jeff


 
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] The Council for the National Interest

[Jeff via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

At 13:36 31-07-15 +0200, A.R. G via Marxism wrote:
>
>> Iyad Burnat, the head of the Bi'lin Popular Committee" whose only guilt
>is signing a petition in error?
>
>How about everything else Iyad does, are all of those things in error too?

Amith, does the word "only" mean anything to you? If not, then please look
it up and you will be able to understand what I said as well as every one
else did who read it. 

- Jeff

_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] The Council for the National Interest

[Jeff via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

At 13:50 31-07-15 +0200, A.R. G via Marxism wrote:
>
>If Jeff's politics and witch-hunting are considered leftism then he can
>have leftism. I'll take Iyad Burnat and Ed Peck instead

Well you're on the wrong list then and we have nothing to discuss. I'd like
contributions from others on this list who consider themselves Marxists,
thus leftists.
- Jeff


_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Fwd: Letter to JVP on Alison Weir affair - DemocraticUnderground

[Jeff via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

At 18:01 31-07-15 -0400, Louis Proyect via Marxism wrote:
>http://www.democraticunderground.com/1021227


You just got done shutting down discussion on this very issue (which I
totally understand because it became totally unproductive). But now I guess
it's fair game again. I have no interest in debating with one person on
this list but tomorrow I will (after fully reading through this piece)
compare and report what I have determined from looking at the evidence
about this person and the dangers that both Jewish Voice for Peace and the
US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation detected and responded to. 

- Jeff


_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Marxism] Alison Weir defense from predictable quarters :-(

[Jeff via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

End The Jewish Occupation Of The Solidarity Movement
By Gilad Atzmon on July 17, 2015

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2015/07/17/end-the-jewish-occupation-of-the-solidarity-movement/
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Re; Alison Weir defense from predictable quarters

[Jeff via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

At 01:17 03-08-15 +0200, A.R. G via Marxism wrote:
>
>Here are some of the other predictable quarters that are defending Weir:

Oh why bother with the endorsement list. Hell, I might have signed that
stupid letter MYSELF! I mean what if someone I TRUSTED came and said "Hey,
this liberal group of Jewish activists (who don't even call themselves
anti-zionist!) is accusing a leading militant of antisemitism and are
refusing to work with her! Could you sign on to this protest, please?"

If anything, what I find unusual about the endorsers list is the few number
of conspicuous leftists. And the few leftists on this list (or on the full
list I also downloaded), have essentially signed on in error as far as I'm
concerned. I try to think that I've become more careful than to make the
mistake I sketched out above, but we all can jump to conclusions or act on
the basis of prejudice. 

Outside of those few leftists, the endorsers all believe in promoting the
interests of the United States, as is the avowed purpose of the
organization. The movement most leftists are involved in is solidarity with
Palestine. That difference is clear even if you ignore the connections of
their leader to the far right and antisemitism.

- Jeff


>
>Richard Falk, Professor of International Law Emeritus, Princeton
>University, and former Special Rapporteur on Occupied Palestine, UN Human
>Rights Council.
>
>Samia Khoury, founding member of the board of Trustees of Birzeit
>University and Sabeel Ecumenical Liberation Theology Centre, author,
>"Reflections from Palestine: A Journey of Hope" (descendant of Birzeit
>University founders).
>
>Ann Wright, retired US Army Colonel and former US diplomat turned peace
>activist; passenger on 2010 Gaza Freedom Flotilla; co-organizer and
>passenger on Gaza Freedom Flotillas 2011 & 2015; co-organizer of 2009 Gaza
>Freedom March.
>
>Iyad Burnat, Palestinian grassroots activist, Bil'in Popular Committee
>
>Dr. Mazin Qumsiyeh, Professor, Bethlehem and Birzeit Universities,
>Co-Founder Al-Awda-Palestine Right to Return Coalition.
>
>Hedy Epstein, Holocaust survivor; St. Louis Palestine Solidarity
>Committee*; Jewish Voice for Peace - St. Louis**
>
>James Abourezk, former Senator, South Dakota, founder of American-Arab
>Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC)
>
>Arun Gandhi, Grandson of Mahatma Gandhi, Gandhi Worldwide Education
>Institute
>
>Pete McCloskey, former Member of Congress (R..Calif. 1967-83) and
>Co-Founder, with Paul Findley, of the Council for the National Interest;
>and Helen McCloskey
>
>Dr. Khalil Nakhleh, author of "Globalized Palestine: The National Sell-Out
>of a Homeland"
>
>George N. Rishmawi, Director, The Palestinian Center for Rapprochement
>between People, Beit Sahour, Palestine
>
>Ray McGovern, Retired CIA officer turned peace activist. Co-founder of
>Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity.
>
>Rita Giacaman, Professor, Research & Program Coordinator and founder,
>Institute of Community and Public Health, Birzeit University; active in
>1980s Palestinian social action movement.
>
>John Whitbeck, Director, Council for the National Interest
>
>Edward Peck, Americans for Middle East Understanding, Former US Ambassador
>to Iraq & Mauritania, Participant in the 2010 Gaza Freedom Flotilla
>
>Abbas Hamideh, National Board Vice Chair, Al-Awda Palestine Right to Return
>Coalition, son of one of the few survivors of the massacre at Deir Yassin
>Palestine on April 9th 1948
>
>Philip Giraldi, Former CIA Officer turned anti-war activist & journalist;
>Executive Director, Council for the National Interest*, member, Veteran
>Intelligence Professionals for Sanity
>
>Cindy Sheehan, anti-war activist and former presidential candidate, Cindy
>Sheehan's Soapbox
>
>Joe Meadors, USS Liberty Survivor, Past President, USS Liberty Veterans
>Association, Participant in three Gaza Freedom Flotillas, Free Palestine
>Movement*.
>
>The Rev. David W. Good, Minister Emeritus for The First Congregational
>Church of Old Lyme, President: Tree of Life Educational Fund
>
>John Erickson, NorCal Friends of Sabeel* -- Co-Chair
>
>Sunaina Maira, Professor of Asian American Studies at UC Davis, USACBI
>
>The Reverend Canon Richard K. Toll, former Director, Friends of Sabeel* ,
>Retired Episcopal Priest
>
>Dr. Samir Abed-Rabbo, Professor Emeritus of International Law, Director of
>the Center for Arab and Islamic Studies
>
>Donald A. Kruse, Retired Foreign Services Officer, Consul, Consulate
>General, Jerusalem 1976-1980
>
>Lawrence Davidson, Professor Emeritus, West Chester University
>
>Elizabeth Murray, former Deputy Intellignece Officer for the Near East,
>National Intelligence Council
>
>James Petras, Pr

Re: [Marxism] 15 foods you should never eat

[Jeff via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

On 2015-08-05 17:52, Charles Faulkner via Marxism wrote:


http://www.sfgate.com/life/healthzone/article/15-Foods-you-should-never-eat-6424926.php


Simple-minded lists of foods "never to be eaten" are bullshit. If you 
merge every such list you'll find you have nothing left still allowed in 
your diet. An informed approach to diet should take into account an 
individual's medical concerns and not the plethora of half-truths 
contained in shock articles such as this. Same goes for foods that claim 
great health benefits if you weren't inclined to eat them anyway.

- Jeff
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Why Israel Fears the Boycott

[Jeff via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

At 11:48 05-08-15 -0700, Ken Hiebert via Marxism wrote:
>
> In my opinion, BDS has been the occasion for a real step forward in 
>Palestine solidarity work.

(unquestionably!)

>  I do not regard human rights as "bourgeois rights."

I am sure almost everyone on this list recognizes the validity of "human
rights" according to any reasonable definition of that term. I know that
some intellectuals or contrarians might find it enjoyable to split hairs
over the matter, but in practice any leftist will be in favor of struggles
advancing the rights of the oppressed (the oppressors don't need "rights,"
they hold power regardless). Just because some rights were first championed
during the bourgeois revolution (aka "democratic revolution) doesn't mean
that we can't claim them for ourselves and struggle on that basis as we do
routinely whether using that language or not.

Of course there is one category of bourgeois rights that we certainly don't
support: property rights. But that is not what is normally understood by
"human rights" and in fact our message typically counterposes human rights
to property rights should there be any doubt. Likewise, the curious
American legal definition of corporations as "persons" defies any
reasonable understanding of who are the proper beneficiaries of the rights
in question. Nor does the fact that human rights extend to humans of all
classes reduce their validity. Whenever our struggles (such as for
Palestine) can be framed in terms of basic rights, then as a matter of
course our explanations include such wording. This isn't controversial and
I'd worry about any efforts to the contrary. 

- Jeff





_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Letter from Scottish Palestine Solidarity Campaign

[Jeff via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

On 2015-08-07 15:58, Ken Hiebert via Marxism wrote:


Letter from SPSC to US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation


Across the whole range of Palestine solidarity groups and networks in
the UK, none could write or appear even once in White supremacist
newspapers or social media; it is unthinkable.


Well I wonder if this is just some strange Scottish position. Time for a 
reality check. Let's take a poll. Out of all the prominent Marxist 
activists and scholars on this list, please tell us how many times YOU 
have written for a publication of or appeared on a broadcast by a 
far-right hate group (let's say one which has been so identified by the 
SPLC for instance). HOW MANY TIMES? If the answer is zero, don't send in 
a reply in order to avoid swamping the list server.


Thanks for all your answers. I really had wanted to know.

- Jeff

P.S. For positive answers, I'd also be interested if you were invited 
back for a follow-up by them!



_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Marxism] Poll results: list members published by far-right

[Jeff via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

I'm not quite ready to announce the results of the poll yet, since I'm
still waiting for all the replies to pour in, and don't want to conduct any
sort of "snap election."

Again, please participate in the poll and report the approximate number (if
greater than zero) of times you have appeared in a far-right publication or
radio program. Then we will compare the number of such cases by Marxists on
this list in comparison to certain other forces which superficially share
some of our rhetoric. I will take responsibility for tallying the results
and report them soon. Thanks in advance,

- Jeff


_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Poll results: list members published by far-right

[Jeff via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

Well I am finally ready to announce the results of the poll among Marxmail 
subscribers. Again, the question posed was:

At 16:28 07-08-15 +0200, Jeff via Marxism wrote:
>
> Time for a 
>reality check. Let's take a poll. Out of all the prominent Marxist 
>activists and scholars on this list, please tell us how many times YOU 
>have written for a publication of or appeared on a broadcast by a 
>far-right hate group (let's say one which has been so identified by the 
>SPLC for instance). HOW MANY TIMES? If the answer is zero, don't send in 
>a reply in order to avoid swamping the list server.

Well there was pretty much a lack of positive responses; people for whom the 
answer would be "zero" were not expected to respond (but Michael Kardjis did 
anyway, perhaps because he didn't read the fine print or maybe to emphasize the 
fact). The only other response was from Joe Catron who couldn't say for sure 
because he's too busy to track where his articles are reposted. He said I 
should check Google which I did (detailed below), but from which I believe the 
answer for him is, again, zero.

I suppose I should have differentiated between intentional appearances where 
someone sent their material to (or knowingly agreed to appear in) far-right 
media, and cases where their material was reposted without their permission. 
But the answer in both cases is probably zero for all list members. Material 
reposted without permission might not have been noticed, but I assume most 
prolific writers Google their own names at least occasionally (but if you do 
that daily, then you really have a problem ;-)

Of course the reason this issue came up is that there are some individuals and 
groups associated with the defense of Palestine -- or more correctly the 
anti-Israel movement -- who don't seem to have a problem associating themselves 
with the far-right. This isn't new except that one of them, Alison Weir, 
protested that she was being shunned by most of the Palestine solidarity 
movement, which led to statements by Jewish Voice for Peace and the US Campaign 
to End the Israeli Occupation explaining their unwillingness to work with her 
(and the two organizations she leads), citing among other evidence her repeated 
appearances and articles in the far-right (including white supremacist) media.

An open appeal which happens to be authored by one member of this list 
denounced that accusation as "guilt by association" and defended her appearance 
in far-right media as being normal and a valid attempt to reach ordinary 
working folks among those media's readership/listenership. But of course we 
aren't talking about right-wing mass media (such as the FOX TV network) but 
far-right "fringe" outlets typified by the radio show of Clay Douglas on which 
Weir appeared repeatedly:
  http://www.freeamerican.com/

So the difference I see between Palestinian solidarity activists on this list 
(as well as most who are not on this list but therefore didn't participate in 
the poll) and someone like Alison Weir, is that we would NEVER want to be 
associated with such filth (nor appear in their media except perhaps to trash 
it) whereas Weir apparently has no problem with such an association. With such 
a stark difference between us and her, I'm afraid I DO consider the simple 
matter of "association" in this regard as indicating probable guilt. And 
considering the further evidence cited by the Jewish Voice for Peace and the US 
Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation in their statements, I would consider 
the matter settled beyond doubt:

http://www.endtheoccupation.org/article.php?id=4510

https://jewishvoiceforpeace.org/jewish-voice-for-peace-statement-on-our-relationship-with-alison-weir/

It is nothing new that a large section of the far right opposes Israel; this is 
partially due to their antisemitism and tendency to conflate an ethnicity with 
a nation-state. What is somewhat newer (last decade or so) is for those same 
racists to shed crocodile tears for the Palestinians (despite their own history 
of racism against Arabs and other people of color) in that pursuit. The height 
of that duplicity is when they figured out they could rebrand their 
antisemitism as "anti-zionism", and take advantage of our proper defense of 
anti-zionism as not being antisemitic (countering the Zionist charge). Of 
course their infiltration of our ranks unfortunately creates a sliver of truth 
to the Zionist charge, but that is only because we haven't sufficiently 
differentiated our

Re: [Marxism] Poll results: list members published by far-right

[Jeff via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

At 18:12 10-08-15 -0700, michael perelman via Marxism wrote:
>
>Tom Keene gave me a hour-long interview on his show on Bloomberg radio.

Oh hell, I'd forgive you for that! ;-)

This is where you might expect something of an exception, since Marxist
economics as a theory has gained interest and a slight respect including
among the ruling class especially since the crisis. But in terms of the
original poll, they don't really count as "far-right", as we were more
concerned with fascists, racists, conspiricists, etc. And their media which
would be frequented mainly by people already in the far-right. Bloomberg is
more mainstream ruling class, no?

- Jeff

>
>Although he is quite conservative, he was able to converse with me without
>any spoken disapproval. I got a lot of support form my appearance, but
>then, he never invited me back.

>-- 
>Michael Perelman
>Economics Department
>California State University
>Chico, CA
>95929
>
>530 898 5321
>fax 530 898 5901
>http://michaelperelman.wordpress.com

_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Roundtable on the Palestinian solidarity movement and Alison Weir (Mondoweiss)

[Jeff via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

At 09:50 16-08-15 -0400, Louis Proyect via Marxism wrote: 
>
>
>
>http://mondoweiss.net/2015/08/roundtable-palestinian-solidarity/

I'm glad to see this issue brought up again on the list, since as far as
I'm concerned this discussion -- yes pointing to Alison Weir in particular
but about so much more! -- has barely begun and needs to be resolved. A
filthy open letter was circulated ostensibly in defense of this poor
defamed individual, but in reality trying to force the Palestinian
solidarity movement into the paradigm of a right-left alliance; such an
orientation would be destructive to our vision of advancing toward
socialist revolution and to the struggle of the Palestinians (which is not
exclusively anti-capitalist but includes nationalist and democratic
content) as it profoundly changes the goals of those struggles. 

These struggles would be reduced to an emotional but vacuous front against
"imperialism", "Western liberalism", and "Israel"; these are terms that
have a very different meaning to rightists and leftists (which includes
essentially all Palestinians whether they describe themselves as "left" or
not). By removing their underlying content, it becomes possible for the
left and right to agree on many very specific facts and figures which we
together decry, while hiding/ignoring the very opposite goals of the left
(those who want to advance the interests and power of the working class
internationally) and the right (those who want to consolidate the power of
the capitalists within their scope). Because most of these movements have
been mainly been associated with the left, the main effect of such a
right-left alliance is not to expose right wingers to our vision (and
perhaps win a few over), but the opposite. And to transform the political
movements involved away from their original goals, rather to serve
anti-progressive purposes even while retaining much of our original rhetoric.

This matter of a right-left alliance subverting the content of our
movements probably appears in no starker fashion than in the case of the
anti-Israel movement, which we correctly call -- but which the rightists
are now happy to call -- the Palestinian solidarity movement. I don't need
to list the reasons we oppose Israel and Zionism, but for the right there
are some very different reasons. One important one is that many among the
ruling class in the West are beginning to see Israel more as a liability
rather than a tool as it arguably had been in the past. The second of
course is antisemitism which has been a common aspect of the far-right, and
by joining in our call for "Freedom for Palestine" they have found a cover
by which their filthy underbelly can be shielded. 

Among the 3 articles published by Mondoweiss (supposedly as a round table)
the first I find major agreement with but it really focuses on the second
aspect (antisemitism), and does so more in relation to this single
individual. So the broader question of the right-left alliance isn't
discussed as such. I hope to raise the discussion beyond that and invite
readers to respond to what I shall later post today.

The second article is rather apolitical (at least in terms of the relevant
issues) and I don't consider it part of any roundtable discussion on the
issue. The third is a predictable defense of one named individual on the
basis of formalities, such as Weir's formal declaration against
antisemitism and arguing that such an accusation against her can't be
proven, which I sort of agree with. In a court of law she might very well
have a strong defense case and be able to argue that her relationship to
known antisemites counts as "guilt by association." And frankly I don't
know or care if she *personally* hates Jews. For that matter, I don't even
know if Hitler was personally antisemitic; what's important is that he used
antisemitism as part of a political project that didn't mainly have to do
with Jews. Likewise for Weir, and in those terms must the discussion proceed.
 
- Jeff



_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Report on Convention: Veterans for Peace gives Assad & ISIS a new tool

[Jeff via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

At 01:22 19-08-15 -0700, Clay Claiborne via Marxism wrote:
>
>
>  Report on Convention: Veterans for Peace gives Assad & ISIS a new
>  tool
>  
> 

Good for you Clay! It's a pity that you were alone and couldn't attend the 
sessions while minding the table you set up. But it sounds like your 
impression of their content with respect to Syria is accurate.

This seems like a far cry from the Veterans for Peace that came out of the 
Vietnam war, holding the Winter Soldier hearings and otherwise exposing what 
they had witnessed in Vietnam, and reporting the criminal actions they were 
ordered to perform. Like in that war, many of the Syrian government soldiers 
had no interest in fighting against the revolution but were conscripted. And 
in both cases many of those who had voluntarily enlisted turned against 
their commanders after seeing what role they were placed in, and rebelled. 
Ones who made it back from Vietnam joined the antiwar movement and founded 
Veterans for Peace. Likewise in Syria the person ordered to photograph the 
bodies of prisoners tortured to death snuck his family out of Syria along 
with thousands of those photos to show to the world. Many others defected to 
the revolution, forming the backbone of the Free Syrian Army.

But wait: isn't Veterans for Peace open to all veterans? At their convention 
they should have had veterans from the Syrian Arab Army to document their 
own atrocities, in the fine tradition of the organization. Rather than 
repeating fairy tales about American involvement in Syria. Unfortunately 
those deserters are too busy fighting on the right side now. Still, you'd 
think Veterans for Peace would see it as their responsibility to hear the 
stories of Syrian veterans -- you know, ones who were actually there -- and 
bring them to testify at their convention. Or at least to display the grisly 
photographic evidence. Then let the "anti-imperialists" argue that the 
barrel bombs, chlorine attacks, and recent air strikes in urban Douma are a 
necessary response to some Western meddling. Or whatever :-(

- Jeff

...
>> The United States has now admitted that the coalition air strike
>> against the Free Syria Army unit in Idlib that killed 25 Syrian was a
>> deliberate attack after earlier denials. However this is not expected
>> to change the charge by those in the pro-Assad, /"anti-imperialist"/
>> /"Left"/ that they are the /"US backed"/ rebels. Since that was always
>> a lie, they have no reason to change it now.
>
>*More...*
>



_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Bild.de: The truth about Assad's war on Syria

[Jeff via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

At 23:43 23-08-15 +1000, Michael Karadjis via Marxism wrote:
>
>-Original Message- 
>From: Clay Claiborne via Marxism
>
>(asking Luko):
>> ARE YOU CLAIMING THIS STUFF ISN'T HAPPENING?
>> Are you like Assad? What barrel-bombs? Are you one of those?
>
>I very much doubt Luko is "like Assad", but yes he does appear to be 
>"one of those."

Minor point, but I don't think Clay was asking if Luko was "like Assad" in
multiple respects. But only whether he was, like Assad, denying the
brutality of the regime. With a specific allusion to Assad's notorious
interview with the BBC where he claimed to know nothing about any barrel
bombs. So in that respect, I do agree that Luko seems to have become "one
of those," thus like Assad.

But I'd like the discussion on this list to remain civil, and for Clay's
charge not to be misinterpreted as saying something even more extreme about
Luko. The fact that Luko is willing to ignore or deny what the Syrian
ruling class is doing to maintain its power is bad enough. Or perhaps Luko
would like to calmly respond and tell us how serious he thinks the regime's
human rights abuses are, and how those might be justified. For the sake of
argument, Luko, let's say that the target of Assad's air force were only
ISIS. What justification would there be for the use of chemical weapons or
dropping barrel bombs in populated areas?

- Jeff
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] The Russian army is beginning to engage in Syria

[Jeff via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

At 12:56 24-08-15 -0700, Clay Claiborne via Marxism wrote:
>
>http://www.voltairenet.org/article188522.html

The author of the piece Thierry Meyssan is associated with conspiracy
theories, so I would be somewhat skeptical of the article's contents. Is
there any independent evidence for his claims?

On the other hand, the actual claim corresponding to the headline is:

>Russia ... has just created a Russo-Syrian Commission, has begun
>supplying weapons, sharing intelligence, and sending advisors.

None of that sounds new at all. Or am I missing something?

- Jeff
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Hezbollah: US Not in Favour of Destabilizing Syrian Gov�t

[Jeff via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

At 13:05 11-11-14 -0500, Joseph Catron via Marxism wrote:
>
>On Tue, Nov
11, 2014 at 7:31 AM, Louis Proyect  wrote:
>
>"Regime
collapse, while not considered a likely outcome, was perceived to
>> be the
worst possible outcome for U.S. strategic interests."
>>
>> Rand
Corporation (http://www.rand.org/pubs/perspectives/PE129.html)

And actually the full document available at that webpage (about a 20 minute
read) I found very revealing. The Rand corporation surely represents the
brains of the ruling class, but not being politicians they don't need to
adjust their approach for the purpose of getting re-elected etc.

>That's your basis for claiming that the US government sees the FSA as
a
>bunch of dirty commies?

Of course no one ever said commies or anything of the sort. They simply
don't find the FSA useful for any of their purposes. These people are
pragmatists, above all.

>
>I could start listing reasons the US might not want Syria to become
a
>failed state on a par with Libya

I can't believe Joseph wrote "failed state" WITHOUT quotation marks!
"Failed state" means the state failed to serve the interests of those who
are leveling the charge. So in that light, yes very much: the imperialists
who were eager to intervene on the side of the Libyan revolution did not
get the CLIENT STATE that they were hoping for. That forced a rethink about
going full out to support what they would predict to be the winning side in
an Arab revolution, and their Syria policy has had everything to do with
that recalculation. If the Syrian National Coalition (which they demanded
be created in order to receive the Western aid that never materialized)
with the FSA were ever actually on the verge of taking power, then of
course they would "support it" while trying to insure a more compliant
state than Libya became. But it never got to that point, so they never had
to gamble for an outcome that might well have disappointed them again. So
as you can see in the Rand report, a stable Syrian state under the current
regime is far less a worry to them than the uncertainty following a
successful revolution against it.

- Jeff



_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Marxism] The EU shifting its strategy on Syria.....

[Jeff via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

 
At 15:56 19-01-15 -0500, Louis Proyect via Marxism wrote:
>
>
>NY Times,
Jan. 19 2015
>U.S. Support for Syria Peace Plans Demonstrates Shift in
Priorities

I had meant to post a link to the following article when I first saw it,
but since this is about their long-term policy it is as relevant now as it
was 3 weeks ago. It purports to reveal the positions expressed in a closed
meeting of European ministers with United Nations envoy Staffan de Mistura.
Largely it confirms that the US policy shift described in the NYT article
is being followed by the EU.
- Jeff


The EU shifting its strategy on Syria, Iraq and fighting ISIS
Al-Akhbar, December 27, 2014
By: Sami Kleib

http://english.al-akhbar.com/node/23044
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Ukraine run by 'miserable' Jews: rebel chief [Zakharchenko]

[Jeff via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

At 14:54 03-02-15 -0500, Louis Proyect via Marxism wrote:
>
>Actually, the article state:
>
>->Alexander Zakharchenko, leader of the self-proclaimed Donetsk People's 
>Republic, claimed that Kiev's pro-Western leaders were "miserable 
>representatives of the great Jewish people".<-
>
>This does not exactly sound anti-Semitic.

No, those words aren't anti-Semitic per se, as I might have said the same
about the rulers of Israel.

But wait a minute! How many of Ukraine's leaders are Jewish in the first
place? Enough that you could refer to them that way and be talking about
most of them? I doubt it (does anyone have those numbers?). If you ignore
the adjectives "miserable" and "great", then you are left with a statement
that most of Ukraine's leaders are Jewish, and THAT is what can be called
"anti-Semitic." Just as much as remarking that "The international bankers
are miserable representatives of the great Jewish people." It is relies on
existing anti-Semitism along with (what is probably) a lie.

The fact that they included the phrase "the great Jewish people" just means
they are not crude anti-Semites but more sophisticated propagandists. It is
like when a (sophisticated) Islamophobe says "These terrorists are BLAH
BLAH BLAH.. BLAH whereas most Muslims are decent folk" or more crudely
"Some of my best friends are  but THESE types are a disgrace to
their race/religion/nationality. 

Of course it's sad that identifying a group as Jewish-dominated would serve
to discredit them. But I do think that is the main purpose of the
statement, not that they are "miserable" or that the Jewish people are
(please!) "great."

- Jeff










_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Theory Question on right-wing anti-Zionism

[Jeff via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

At 03:10 04-03-15 -0500, A.R. G via Marxism wrote:
>
>I've seen a number of rightists, including some far-rightists who have
>vocally condemned, in stinging terms, the slaughter of people in Gaza.

>Do their views about other topics negate their
>support for Palestine?...

>And on the flipside, what should I make of "leftists" like the
>Anti-Deutsch, or the AWL, or the US SWP

Thanks Amith for your post, which brings up a number of crucial issues that
receive insufficient attention, in my opinion. I'm, sure a major cause of
that inattention is explained by the discomfort it causes to those on the
left who are either explicitly or de facto in an "anti-imperialist"
alliance with (part of) the far right, as we have discussed extensively in
other contexts. Left unspoken in Amith's post, but obviously of great
relevance, is the issue of antisemitism, which I'm sure we can all agree is
a right wing ideology like all forms of racism or religious bigotry. There
are at least 3 rather distinct issues raised within this discussion:

1) The paradox of far right "support" for the Palestinians and their
national liberation struggle. 

2) The actual existence or appearance of antisemitism among Palestinians or
other oppressed peoples of the region who are directly threatened by
Israel. (Which is a different issue from antisemitism among
"pro-Palestinian" campaigners in Europe, for instance, which more falls
into category (1)).

3) The unfortunate reaction of some leftist groups -- ones that are really
left, according to their program on any number of issues -- to the question
of antisemitism, in which they are led to an inexcusable softness towards
or wholesale support for Zionism.

I could expound extensively on any of these questions but will just say a
few things in relation to (1), but would appreciate discussion on the list
around these other issues. I don't have much time at the moment, so I'll be
brief.


I remember how shocked and confused I was the first time I read a
"pro-Palestinian" position expounded by a clearly fascist group! I don't
remember which one it was, but what I'm saying applies to all such cases.
In Europe and North America these fascist groups are invariably white
racist and their views of Arabs are no better than any other people of
color. It is inexplicable that they would see the suffering of Palestinians
and be morally outraged while having no such reaction to the Nazi
holocaust. You cannot find in their writings solidarity with
anti-imperialist struggles in general or defense of minorities in European
countries. Or support for any other struggles by Arabs where Israel isn't
involved. The only possible explanation for their "solidarity" with
Palestine, having internalized the mainstream narrative of a "Jewish-Arab
conflict" in the middle-east, is anti-semitism. Period. I have no doubt
about that, and that is why I see their "support" for Palestine as being
disingenuous and having nothing to with the actual solidarity movement let
alone the concerns of the left. I can't be sufficiently emphatic on this
point without access to the volume control on your computer.

Now maybe I didn't need to point that out to most people reading this, but
it leads to the practical questions of how we leftists, and Palestinian
solidarity organizations which aren't explicitly left, deal with the
appearance of such "supporters" in our midst. As a leftist I denounce them
as fascist or far-right whenever I see them, since that's what they are.
Palestine solidarity groups can and should denounce them for their
antisemitism, as for any display of racism, when it can be discerned. For
instance, in the Netherlands our demonstrations prohibit the presence of
signs or slogans that are even remotely anti-semitic.

Sometimes people join us with signs or writings which aren't consciously
antisemitic, such as accusing Israel of "controlling" Western governments
(the concept of the "international Jewish conspiracy"), and they just need
to become aware of an issue that they weren't sensitive to. I would never
express hostility to such a person or group, when it is indeed innocent.
However there are cases where an identical public face belongs to a
far-right ACTUALLY antisemitic group, and they know exactly what they are
doing! Likewise, someone can, for instance, innocently denounce atrocities
or machinations by "Jews", meaning Israel. Experienced activists (not just
leftists) are careful to refer to "Zionism" or Israel as the enemy, so when
such sloppy wording is encountered we have to help improve it, or identify
an actual antisemite when that is the case.

Unfortunately the most sophisticated fasci

Re: [Marxism] Theory Question on right-wing anti-Zionism

[Jeff via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

At 16:04 04-03-15 -0500, Louis Proyect via Marxism wrote:
>
>This is an important point. Our movement is trying to persuade young 
>people, especially Jews, to turn against Zionism so any blunder, if one 
>that is innocent in character, can be used by our enemies against us.

Well it goes without saying that in any context, our blunders (and by
definition all blunders are "innocent") will likely be used against us by
our enemies. And perhaps that needs to be emphasized in the context of
Palestine/Israel where we know that there is a widespread and efficient
Zionist machine setup to exploit each and every blunder made by our side.
But of course in between our blunders, that propaganda machine is equally
busy distorting and falsely portraying anything we do which ISN'T a blunder
as "anti-semitic," regardless.

Rather than "walking on eggshells," as I understand that expression, I
agree more with the subsequent posts by Amith and Joseph. In particular, if
we act cowardly ("defensive" in Joseph's terms) only when dealing with
Israel, bending over backwards to avoid the "anti-semitic" label, then they
will have already won half the battle. The signals we unconsciously give
out will be interpreted by our target audience as guilt, as if
anti-semitism is something we have to hide or suppress, as if anti-semitism
naturally infects the Palestinian struggle, thus affirming the very
allegation advanced by our enemy! We don't need to present antisemitism as
any more (or less) evil than any other form of racism, all of which we
reject unequivocally. The burden of proof of antisemitism (unless we
actually HAVE blundered) is on the accuser, and even in mainstream circles
the false equivalence between anti-Zionism and anti-semitism is,
thankfully, eroding.

So what we need to do (as well as with other issues) is to be PRECISE in
our wording and in our concepts. For instance, it is not totally uncommon
for someone to accidentally say "Jewish" when they mean "Zionist." When
someone makes such a linguistic error, they can just acknowledge the error
and explain what they meant. When someone makes such an error in writing,
it shouldn't appear in the published version because it will have been
caught in the proofreading stage. If  "walking on eggshells" means an extra
proofread for writings that will be dissected by the Zionist propaganda
machine, that's fine. But if it means hiding some of what we think because
we're afraid of being misconstrued, then we're digging our own grave.

- Jeff

P.S. I also agree with Joseph that our target audience is no more Jewish
than the proportion of Jews is among the general population.



>

_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Theory Question on right-wing anti-Zionism

[Jeff via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

This thread has proceeded in a different direction, however I will clarify
myself in response to the disagreement Amith has expressed with my earlier
post:

At 11:27 04-03-15 -0500, A.R. G via Marxism wrote:
>
>Hi Jeff,
>
>Thanks for your input. I do, however, take issue with this particular
>paragraph:
>
>"It is inexplicable that they would see the suffering of Palestinians
>and be morally outraged while having no such reaction to the Nazi
>holocaust. You cannot find in their writings solidarity with
>anti-imperialist struggles in general or defense of minorities in European
>countries. Or support for any other struggles by Arabs where Israel isn't
>involved. The only possible explanation for their "solidarity" with
>Palestine, having internalized the mainstream narrative of a "Jewish-Arab
>conflict" in the middle-east, is anti-semitism."
>
>See, I don't see Palestine as just another human rights struggle. I think
>there are obvious elements of the Zionist colonization of Palestine that
>are distinct

> I can
>think of plenty of reasons, then, why someone would particularly single out
>Israel while not being very aware or supportive of other Arab causes.

Well I absolutely agree that the state of Israel and its actions represent
an extreme case in a number of respects. If we were giving out academy
awards for the most egregious actions by a capitalist state, then Israel
would walk away with the most awards, no sweat. So yes, there are plenty of
reasons a non-activist would see the plight of the Palestinians and be
motivated to action (thus "singling out Israel") for the first time. But
all that isn't relevant to my point.

I wasn't talking about individuals who become outraged about Israel without
"being very aware or supportive of other Arab causes," or even being aware
of the Nazi holocaust if they haven't learned much history. I was talking
about right-wing ORGANIZATIONS and published WRITERS who cannot claim such
ignorance. I was saying that if a KNOWLEDGEABLE person or organization were
simply reacting to the moral outrage of Palestinian oppression, then they
would undoubtedly take a position (even if no action) in response to other
terrible violations of national or human rights currently taking place or
recorded in history. Mentioning the holocaust was just one particular
example, but a very pertinent one in relation to some fascists, since it is
universally denounced by almost everyone except for fascists who trace back
to the Nazi's. I concluded that their concern for Palestine and
insensitivity to (or knowing denial of) that historic crime, could only be
a sign of their antisemitism. I couldn't possibly give them credit for
compassion in the one case and not the other. They choose to support
Palestine, and no other Arabs, because they DO believe that anti-Zionism =
anti-semitism and realize they can make more friends using the former
terminology. Having them on "our side" is toxic; they aren't on our side
just because we share a common enemy, and we are wise to disassociate
ourselves from them whenever that would be in question.

Again, I'm not talking about ordinary people who are politically naive. The
fight against anti-semitism doesn't focus on what I would call "ignorant
anti-semitism" disconnected from a political outlook. So suppose apolitical
John Doe has a bad experience with his bank, and decries "all those Jewish
bankers" that screwed him, because he's heard that the world is controlled
by Jewish bankers. I might even express sympathy with him against the
bankers, but try to explain that most bankers aren't Jewish, most Jews
aren't bankers, and there is no widespread "Jewish conspiracy" beyond what
Israel has created for its own purposes. If I fail then he may well go on
to become a POLITICAL antisemite, but otherwise I just see him as being an
example of ignorance. In an atmosphere of organized anti-semitism that
could still make him dangerous, but in a liberal Western society if he
doesn't have much power and isn't violent, then I wouldn't worry about him
in particular.

But again, an organization that is political enough to be called "right
wing" cannot claim ignorance, and their adoption of the cause of Palestine
cannot be seen as having anything in common with our positions. That is my
point.

Further:

>I also worry that constantly trying to find & condemn "anti-Semitism" can
>essentially function as a form of soft Zionism.

Excuse me, but where did I say that I spend my spare time rooting out
anti-semitism? I am much more concerned with Islamophobia affecting Europe.
But the question Amith posed was how to explain and orient to fascists who
claim solidari

[Marxism] Holocaust "minimization"

[Jeff via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

On Thu, March 5, 2015 17:51, Ken Hiebert via Marxism wrote:
>
> Some scattered comments.

Most of Ken's comments were welcome, but the following segment has left me
rather confused:

> The question of our relationship with one strand of right- wing
> "anti-Zionism" was posed sharply at the AGM of the Palestine Solidarity
> Campaign in the UK at the beginning of 2012.
>
> http://site.lalkar.org/article/566/palestinesolidarity-movement-on-the-defensive-as-agm-votes-for-zionist-formulations
> The meeting voted to endorse a paragraph that the PSC executive had
> recently added to the campaign website stating that “Any expression of
> racism or intolerance, or attempts to deny or minimise the Holocaust have
> no place in our movement. Such sentiments are abhorrent in their own right
> and can only detract from the building of a strong movement in support of
> the fundamental rights of the Palestinian people.” (My emphasis)`

Perhaps just a bit of context was missing, but it wasn't clear if Ken
posted the above link in approval or otherwise. The quoted policy
statement looked perfectly good to me, but the article pointed to (of the
journal Lalkar, apparently connected to the CPGB-ML, neither of which was
I familiar with) took issue with the statement. The underlined text, lost
as it got sent by email, was "attempts to deny or minimise the Holocaust"
and the Lalkar article laments that "they voted to give the PSC’s
executive the ability to discipline and expel sincere and useful
solidarity activists for committing a ‘crime’ that exists only in the
zionist imagination – the crime of ‘minimising the holocaust’." I trust
that this is NOT Ken's view!

[Just as a point of list procedure, I'd expect that if a quotation or link
is introduced without any introduction or disclaimer, then the poster is
generally agreeing with it or at least introducing it as a source of
useful information.]

Without denying the holocaust, the article in Lalkar implies that the
formula of "minimization" was vague enough that it could be misused. Well,
almost any rule can be misused, but the spirit of the above statement is
certainly on the mark.

I had mentioned in an earlier post that the Dutch Palestine Committee
(NPK) has a strict policy against displays at demos which are even vaguely
antisemitic. Cynics dismiss that as motivated solely by the fact that
antisemitism doesn't look good. Well no, it doesn't look good, because it
ISN'T good, and it isn't who we are. I don't think it is the
responsibility of Palestinians or their supporters to concentrate on
fighting antisemitism, which is already discredited in most mainstream
circles (at least officially). But it is our responsibility to clean up
our own quarters when it becomes infected with racist filth. And a
positive by-product of that policy happens to be that some right-wingers
who (as I have argued) may act as friends of Palestine but only due to
their antisemitism, will find themselves unwelcome.

But on a more subtle note, I was also surprised that the demo policy also
prohibited signs comparing the Nazi's to the Israeli government, such as
drawing the flag of Israel with a swastika on it, or a Hitler mustache on
Netanyahu. I disagreed, because surely there ARE parallels between the
Zionists and the Nazi's, and making such a comparison, even when
inaccurate, surely doesn't qualify as "anti-semitism." However I came to
learn that the point of the policy is to avoid the debate shifting away
from Israel to the holocaust, in which the Zionists could arguably claim
that the crimes of the Nazis were far beyond anything that Israel has ever
been accused of, at least in terms of scale. That's an opening for the
Zionists' favorite game: justifying anything they do with endless
references to the holocaust. Accepting the terms of that debate, the
crimes of Israel will appear secondary until the Palestinian death toll
approaches 6 million (i.e. all of them), so it's a terrible reference
point.

- Jeff








_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Fwd: "There Is No Such Thing As Time" | Popular Science

[Jeff via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

On Wed, March 11, 2015 13:17, Louis Proyect via Marxism wrote:
>
> http://www.popsci.com/science/article/2012-09/book-excerpt-there-no-such-thing-time

I appreciate that Louis posts to this list interesting articles on
cosmology and the frontiers of physics (and other sciences) even though
they have nothing to do with marxism. Unfortunately this isn't one of
them: it has everything to do with Marxism, namely being diametrically
opposed to materialism, a basic tenet of Marxism, as it makes the absurd
(or meaningless) suggestion that "time is an illusion."

You don't have to read the article too closely to see that it describes a
book in the popular press, from which the author surely receives
royalties, but it so happens that the issues mentioned are absent (with
good reason) from serious physics literature. This much is certain: time
is as much or as little an "illusion" as is space. That must be true
because time and space applying to different inertial reference frames
become folded into each other, as is well known (and accepted) according
the special theory of relativity. The four-dimensional space-time
continuum means very simply that there are four independent variables
specifying any event (or "interaction"), and this is the coordinate system
used in any physical description: an event's location (3 dimensions) and
time of occurance (1 dimension). What special relativity theory shows is
that the "time" dimension is not common to observers who are in different
inertial frames, that is, who are moving with respect to each other, and
this understanding defies intuition and opens the door to pseudoscientific
speculation and obfuscation.

That modern view of the space-time continuum is so well established that
no serious physicist would be caught dead musing whether time is "an
illusion" unless they would question whether space is an "illusion" in the
same breath. And indeed there are many many physicists who believe
(perhaps because they were brought up with religion, for instance) that
ALL reality is an illusion. So they could be called "idealists", but the
work those physicists do does not suffer as a result because they are
still bound to the scientific method, and have to correctly describe the
relationships between all of the "illusory" quantities that concern
physics. It is only when non-intuitive scientific questions are addressed
by non-scientists (or pseudo-scientists) on the basis of one or another
"philosophy" that questions like time being an illusion (but not space)
come to the fore, and this can make good reading for people interested in
science who are not sufficiently informed to realize that these issues
(unlike issues raised in other physics articles Louis has posted) are not
meaningful or helpful in advancing physics.

When the philosophy claimed to provide such an "understanding" is
"Marxism," I can only feel embarrassment. Shane Mage became noted on this
list for arriving at physics conclusions solely on the basis of "Marxist
philosophy." Such conclusions are at best meaningless statements, but
otherwise are propositions which can be, and usually have been,
contradicted by experimental or observational evidence. If something like
that were to be my first contact with "Marxism," then I would have
rejected it as idealism and never given it a fair hearing. So everyone
please, don't make a mockery of Marxism by applying it ignorantly or in
the service of pseudo-science.

- Jeff














_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Fwd: "There Is No Such Thing As Time" | PopularScience

[Jeff via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

At 10:07 11-03-15 -0400, Louis Proyect via Marxism wrote:
>
>On 3/11/15 9:56 AM, Jeff via Marxism wrote:
>>
>
>People should understand that I only post such material to get a rise 
>out of folks like Jeff. It is like the sand that irritates the oyster.

Aha! I should have known.

More surprisingly though, I now see that there are others on this list who
might fancy playing the same game -- even to the point of advancing
idealist conceptions on a Marxism list! -- so I'll avoid snatching the
bait. If anyone wants to discuss serious questions of physics (albeit
off-topic for this list) I would participate. If they would like to couch
their questions or comments in terms of "Marxism" I can deal with that too.
After all, physics and Marxism share the same underlying philosophical
basis: materialism. But neither usefully informs the content of the other.

- Jeff


_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Fwd: CIA Director Says Assad’s Collapse Would Risk Terrorist Takeover - Bloombe rg Business

[Jeff via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

On Mon, March 16, 2015 12:56, Louis Proyect via Marxism wrote:
>
> As opposed to the state terrorism that already exists?
>
> http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-03-13/cia-director-says-assad-s-collapse-would-risk-terrorist-takeover

Depending on who's interpretation you accept, John Kerry said and/or
didn't mean that the US is prepared to negotiate with Assad over the
future of Syria. The BBC commentator presenting that noted that this is
not a change of US policy, but their words finally catching up with their
de facto policy.

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/03/15/politics/john-kerry-negotiate-assad-syria/

_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Amsterdam demo for Syrian struggle

[Jeff via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

I was so busy reporting on the content of the demo I forgot to mention the
"vital statistics." I estimated about 150 people who assembled for the
demo. There was a short march to the headquarters of Amnesty International,
where they supplied a large room for an extended program, again low-key
politically with a number of musicians and poets. The turnout must have
exceeded expectations, as the room had about 50 seats but twice that number
attended.

- Jeff




_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Marxism] Amsterdam demo for Syrian struggle

[Jeff via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

I was pleased to attend a demo yesterday in Amsterdam (held also in other
cities, I understand) in recognition of the 4th anniversary of the
beginning of the Syrian revolution. It was organized by a group appearing
to consist mainly of Syrian expats and refugees and the crowd may have been
too; at least it appeared that 90% of them understood Arabic, but most of
the Arabic content was reproduced in Dutch anyway. Politically it was very
low-key, but at the same time you got the impression of general political
unity, that no political question could have divided the crowd even enough
for anyone to raise their voice. The fronts against  al-Assad and against
ISIS were spoken of in the same breath, without prioritizing or requiring
deeper analysis as the defense of the people suffering was the focus.

If the pundits' view of the Syrians being splintered and consumed by
in-fighting was accurate, they forgot to tell the people attending this
demonstration. If they've determined that the Syrian struggle has become
dominated by "radical Islam," they forgot to tell these Syrians. In fact I
didn't recognize a single religious symbol there nor hear shouts of Allahu
Akbar. I didn't even see a single woman with her head covered, though
unfortunately and unsurprisingly the crowd was largely male. And anyone who
still thinks that the Syrian rebellion was inspired by or sustained by
Western imperialism definitely forgot to tell these Syrians -- who are
desperate for any allies and support! -- or the various politicians (not
just left of center) who are always eager to bring their "good will" to a
pro-Palestinian demonstration for instance. I know that if I had had any of
these misconceptions, I would have been bewildered by those aspects of what
I witnessed there. Of course the various leftists prepared to explain the
Syrian revolution in such terms were completely absent (and won't see it in
the media), so their understandings based on a supposed geopolitical
understanding won't be shaken.

Much as I hate Facebook, pictures from the demo can be found only (I
believe) on this facebook page which I was able to access without a
facebook account. The first dozen or so photos indexed on this page are
from yesterday's demo.
 https://www.facebook.com/syrischecomite/photos

- Jeff




_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] More wisdom from "center-left" Ukrainian pro-Russian activist Pavel Gubarev

[Jeff via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

I looked a bit further into this matter when Roger Annis casually
admitted, that yes Pavel Gubarev had once been a neo-nazi, but don't worry
about it because he since drifted to the "left," winding up as a member of
the Progressive Socialist Party of Ukraine. I was interested in what this
person's politics actually were, beyond supporting Russian nationalism and
separation of Eastern Ukraine. So I thought it would be useful to look at
the politics of that party, one of the pro-separatist parties that has
"Socialist" in its name. Just how "left" are the pro-Russian forces in
this arena?

Well, rather than relying on what others say about them (which of course
can be biased and thus unreliable) I went right to the party's website,
which happens to be www.vitrenko.org, a site named after and dominated by
that party's founder and leader Natalia Vitrenko. But never mind that
detail. I can't read Russian so I used Google Translate which should be
activated if you click on the following link:

https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=ru&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.vitrenko.org%2F

Now, I realize computer translation is quite imperfect and can even
reverse the meaning of a sentence, so I would never take a single item
from such a translation as correctly reflecting the literal views of a
Russian writer. Rather, I was interested in browsing their site and seeing
just how much emphasis there is on socialism/communism or issues properly
associated with "the left" such as workers' struggles, class inequality,
and fighting for individual liberties and against the oppression of women
and cultural, ethnic, and gender minorities.

The short answer is: zero. As far as I could possibly tell, even following
the most promising links on that page, there is NOTHING at all "left" or
"socialist" about the so-called Progressive Socialist Party. But let me be
clear. I was looking for concern with or positions on issues *directly*
describing what we mean by "left," not indirect references such as talking
in favor of other "left" parties or individuals or opposition to the
right. This is an important point, because so much of what can get you
described as "left" or "right" depends on who you verbally support (or
oppose) and this can lead to circular reasoning, divorced from the basic
content. For instance, one might conclude A is left because it supports B
and C, B is left because it supports A and C, and C is left because it
supports A and B. But why were any called "left" in the first place? Only
because they have "socialist" or "worker" in their names? Or perhaps they
are seen as "left" because they oppose NATO and the rise of fascism?
Again, these are not exclusively left positions in and of themselves
(especially when it is a stinging denunciation of "fascists" who aren't!).

So, in looking at this one "left" party among the pro-Russian separatists
of Eastern Ukraine, I find what probably applies to that entire movement:
there is nothing "left" in the content of their politics. On the other
hand you'll have no trouble on that website finding right-wing traits such
as celebrating the orthodox church, patriotism (pro-Russian), and decrying
"Western liberal values" (individual liberties). People posting on this
list, who I DO believe are truly left, need to rethink their support to a
current that has no progressive content. And rethink whether Gubarev
actually migrated from neo-nazism to "leftism" or to a less derided corner
of the far-right.

- Jeff


On Thu, March 19, 2015 15:59, Thomas Campbell via Marxism wrote:
>
> As posted on his Facebook page today:
>
> https://www.facebook.com/pgubarev/posts/1071435022883242?fref=nf
>
> "On the question of what to do next with Ukraine, I reply:
> 1. Complete the affair with a military victory in Kiev, but better yet
> in Lvov.
> 2. Name the new country with an abbreviation: CNU -- the Country of New
> Russia and Ukraine.
> 3. [Implement] velvet Russification and soft imposition of the Russian
> political, cultural, and historical discourse. For at least fifty years.
> 4. Especially stubborn Nazis will have to be sent to the camps.
> 5. Incorporate CNU into Russia in 10-20 years."
>
> Sounds pretty "center-left" to me!


_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Responding re right wing in Russia

[Jeff via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

At 17:36 29-03-15 -0700, Roger Annis via Marxism wrote:

>> I do not deny that Russia.. is host to an extreme right wing with 
>practices such as those you list.

No the existence of legal fascist organizations wasn't the point; the
extreme-right designation was about the state itself. And that in the case
of the Ukraine that state supports Russian nationalists militarily. That
state in St. Petersburg intimidated people and arrested protestors outside
that filthy conference of European fascists. Meanwhile those fascists
expressed their admiration of Putin and the direction Russia has been
going. So add it all up, Roger: the state itself is extreme right wing and
nationalist-expansionist. That's what we're trying to say.
- Jeff


>
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Marxism] ISIS overrunning Yarmouk

[Jeff via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

I'm afraid this is not an April fools joke. I had just heard this on BBC which 
interviewed someone from Yarmouk, which reportedly has been largely overrun by 
ISIS. :-(

The point that the BBC host found significant was that this placed ISIS within 
a short distance of central Damascus, but unfortunately I don't think Assad has 
so much to worry about. The interviewee went on to question why Assad had 
actually allowed ISIS to take the territory around Yarmouk over quite some 
period -- ditto.

Paradoxically, I wonder if this won't bring some relief to the starvation in 
Yarmouk if they are now able to bring in food using ISIS's supply lines. In 
exchange for Sharia law and some beheadings :-(
 
- Jeff


http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Middle-East/2015/Apr-01/292956-isis-seizes-most-of-yarmouk-refugee-camp-in-damascus-plo.ashx

Apr. 01, 2015 | 03:16 PM (Last Updated: April 01, 2015 | 03:49 PM)
ISIS seizes most of Yarmouk refugee camp in Damascus: PLO

Agence France Presse
DAMASCUS: Militants from ISIS seized control of most of the Yarmouk 
Palestinian refugee camp in southern Damascus Wednesday, a local Palestinian 
official told AFP.

"Fighters from ISIS launched an assault this morning on Yarmouk and they 
took over the majority of the camp," said Anwar Abdel Hadi, director of 
political affairs for the Palestine Liberation Organization in Damascus.
Fighting was continuing inside the camp, he said.

The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, a Britain-based activist group, 
said ISIS was in control of a "large part" of the camp after fighting with 
Palestinian groups also opposed to President Bashar Assad's regime.

Yarmouk was once a thriving neighborhood home to 160,000 Palestinian 
refugees and Syrians but has been caught up in the country's fighting and 
besieged by regime forces for more than a year.

Only about 18,000 residents are estimated to remain in the camp after many 
fled the fighting.

Syrian rebels had withdrawn from the camp in February 2014 under a deal that 
left only Palestinian anti-regime groups inside.

The siege has caused significant shortages of food, water and drugs inside 
the camp.

ISIS, which has seized control of large parts of Syria and Iraq, has fought 
not only against the Assad regime but also against other rebel groups as it 
seeks to expand the territory under its control.

_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Marxism] The Syrian Revolution struggles on - rs21

[Jeff via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

Was this piece already posted to this list? I thought so but couldn't find
it. If so, sorry for double-posting, but it's probably worth reading twice!
This is from a British activist, who sums up the current situation well and
properly admonishes the global left for its inaction (or worse).

http://rs21.org.uk/2015/03/29/the-syrian-revolution-struggles-on/

Following a demonstration to mark the fourth anniversary 
of the Syrian Revolution, Mark Boothroyd argues 
the reputation of socialist organisations has 
been seriously damaged by their failure to stand 
alongside Syrians who have continued fighting 
for freedom in terrible conditions.

_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Marxism] Fascism Comes to Ukraine -- From Russia

[Jeff via Marxism]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


On Sat, May 31, 2014 02:57, Louis Proyect via Marxism wrote:
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Russia_Party

Thanks for including the text of this Wikipedia article, but those that
didn't go to the page itself, should do so. Especially in order to look at
this party's flag and let me know if you detect any similarity to a
well-known historical flag!

But also, that page referenced the following useful article which I hadn't
yet seen on this list (or go to this URL to access the included
hyperlinks).

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2014/05/21/fascism_comes_to_ukraine_--_from_russia_122700.html


Fascism Comes to Ukraine -- From Russia

By Cathy Young - May 21, 2014

Despite multiple debunkings, claims that Ukraine’s pro-Western revolution
brought about by the Maidan protests was really a fascist (if not
neo-Nazi) coup persist, and not just from the Kremlin propaganda machine
and conspiracy-minded fringe websites that seek the evil hand of American
imperialism everywhere. The other day, it turned up in a column in The
Guardian by veteran journalist John Pilger, who depicts the Kiev
leadership as a fascist junta and its supporters as homicidal thugs—and
Vladimir Putin as “the only leader to condemn the rise of fascism in
21st-century Europe.” Meanwhile, evidence continues to mount that the
Putin regime is not fighting fascism but promoting it—not just in Europe,
where it is cultivating ties with far-right movements, but in Ukraine,
where the separatist movement in the east is a nest of Kremlin-sponsored
Russian ultranationalists.

The narrative of the United States colluding with neo-Nazis in Ukraine has
a lot of currency on the left. Late last month, the subject came up
repeatedly during an appearance by Ukrainian Jewish leader Josef Zissels,
a strong Maidan supporter, at the YIVO Institute for Jewish Research in
New York. During the question-and-answer period, an angry man in the
audience berated Zissels for downplaying the fascist threat: “Neo-Nazis”
from the Svoboda party, he insisted, had captured key national security
posts including the ministry of defense and were certainly never going to
relinquish that power. When Zissels, clearly impatient with the topic,
pointed out that the Svoboda-affiliated defense minister was already gone
from that post, the man—who turned out to be NYU professor of politics and
veteran Marxist Bertell Ollman, armed with an article from the far-left
online magazine Counterpunch—was visibly skeptical.

But, of course, Zissels was right; Ihor Tehnyuk, the first acting minister
of defense in the interim government and a Svoboda politician, had been
dismissed on March 25 and replaced by a nonpartisan career military
officer. Even apart from being dated, the widely cited Counterpunch piece
contains several inaccuracies. It misidentifies unaffiliated Education
Minister Serhiy Kvit as a Svoboda member, describes national security
chief Andriy Parubiy as a “co-founder of Svoboda” without mentioning his
post-2004 move to moderate and even left-of-center parties, and promotes
Dmitro Yarosh, head of the paramilitary group Right Sector, to deputy
national security chief when in fact he sought that position but did not
get it.

Zissels, like most Maidan revolution supporters, believes that Ukrainian
fascism is a Russian propaganda-inflated phantom menace. (He also echoed
the view, common among Ukrainian liberals, that both Svoboda and Right
Sector were created by the pro-Russian Yanukovych regime—both as tools to
control nationalist activism and as bogeymen to scare the liberal
opposition.) Other observers, such as University of Ottawa political
scientist Ivan Katchanovski, argue that militant far-right nationalists
did play a key role in the violent turn of the protests against the
pro-Russian regime of Viktor Yanukovych in February.

Sorting out these conflicting accounts, in a situation as volatile and
chaotic as this year’s events in Ukraine, is a daunting enterprise.  Among
those interested in facts rather than propaganda wars, there is also
considerable debate about the extent to which either Svoboda or Right
Sector can be described as “fascist.” Katchanovski, who takes a fairly
harsh view of the role of right-wing nationalist groups in Ukraine, has
said that Svoboda is currently “radical nationalist” but not “fascist or
neo-Nazi” or overtly anti-Semitic. At his New York appearance, Zissels
stressed that, whatever this or that nationalist leader may personally
think of Jews, anti-Semitism is not considered acceptable rhetoric in
Ukrainian politics right now.

No less important, events since the fall of the Yanukovych regime strongly
suggest that the current influence of far-right groups is negligible.
Svoboda lawmakers were initially able to push through a 

[Marxism] Hahahahahaha!

[Jeff via Marxism]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


On Mon, June 2, 2014 03:23, Louis Proyect via Marxism wrote:
>
>

An old revolutionary walks across the Brooklyn Bridge one day, and he
sees man of a similar age standing on the edge, about to jump. He runs
over and says: "Stop. Don't do it."

"Why shouldn't I?" he asked.

"Well, there's so much to live for!"

"I'm just depressed, I've been a Communist all my life and the
revolution seems as far away as ever"

"You're a Communist?"

"Yeah, why?"

"I am as well!! Did you originally join the Communist Party USA?"

"Yeah"

"Me too! Did you join the pro-Trotsky Communist League of America in
1928, which later merged with the American Workers Party to form the
Workers Party of America in 1934?"

"Yeah"

"Spooky, Me too! After the WPA was expelled from the Socialist Party of
America in 1936 did you then go on to join the Socialist Workers Party
USA and the fourth international?"

"I did actually…"

"Me too! In the 1940 dispute did you side with Cannon or Shachtman?"

"Cannon."

"Me too! In 1962 did you join Robertson's opposition caucus, the
Revolutionary Tendency?"

"Yep."

" Holly shit! And of course like me you were expelled and went on to
join the International Communist League (Spartacist)"

"Well that goes without saying!"

"In 1985 did you join the International Bolshevik Tendency who claimed
that the Sparts have degenerated into an "obedience cult""

"No way!"

"Nah, me neither. In 1998 did you join the Internationalist Group after
the Permanent Revolution Faction were expelled from the ICL?"

"Yeah! I can't believe this! Maybe I won't…."

"Die counterrevolutionary scum!". And he pushes him off the edge


Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Whyis Iraq being torn apart?

[Jeff via Marxism]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


On Tue, June 17, 2014 12:06, En Passant with John Passant via Marxism wrote:
>
>
> http://enpassant.com.au/2014/06/17/why-is-iraq-being-torn-apart/

I read through the article posted on John Passant's website which was
reprinted from the US Socialist Worker (ISO, I gather), and I found myself
nodding in agreement at most points. Of course we're all trying to make
sense of the recent events in Iraq which is widely attributed to ISIS, or
at least to a coalition in which ISIS appears dominant. But then I ran
across this remark in the article:

"Saudi Arabia and Qatar backed the worst of these Sunni extremist forces,
including ISIS."

Now this statement is sharply disputed by Michael Karadjis in his very
well researched and extensive article where he specifically puts to rest
that assertion (and retracts his previous repetition of such ideas):

http://mkaradjis.wordpress.com/2014/06/03/the-gulf-and-islamism-in-syria-myths-and-misconceptions/

Even without examining the voluminous documentation, it's hard to deny
Michael's obvious point that these regimes wouldn't be trying to bring to
power the Jihadist movements which are so committed to their own
destruction. This error in the ISO article calls into question the
veracity of its other factual material.

And maybe the original source of funding to ISIS is a moot point now that
they have seized half a billion dollars in cash and a billion dollars
worth of military hardware. If the rise of the Jihadists in Syria was in
fact a result of their superior resources (no other good explanation
exists) then their latest acquisitions are yet another great boost to a
force that is toxic both to the Syrian revolution and to Iraqis who were
legitimately opposed to the Maliki regime.

- Jeff




Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Three reasons why Turkey misunderstands ISIS - Al-Monitor: the Pulse of the Middle East

[Jeff via Marxism]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


On Thu, June 19, 2014 16:35, Shane Mage via Marxism wrote:
>>
>> That the CIA might have inadvertently trained some ISIS fighters in
>> Jordan
>
> "Inadvertent?"

Yes, inadvertent. I find that Clay chooses his words carefully, and that's
exactly what he meant and he knows what he's talking about.

By way of illustration, here is another example of non-lethal aid by the
US and UK which might have inadvertently fallen into the "wrong" hands, in
this case not to jihadists but to mainstream Islamic revolutionaries in
Syria. And then note the prompt action they took.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-25331241

- Jeff





Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] $500 million for Obama to support the revolution?

[Jeff via Marxism]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


At 18:14 26-06-14 -0400, Shane Mage via Marxism wrote:
>
>WASHINGTON — President Obama on Thursday requested $500 million from  
>Congress to train and equip what the White House is calling  
>“appropriately vetted” members of the Syrian opposition..."

Well in response to Shane's perhaps premature question: I'd say that after
all of their broken promises and duplicity, the Obama regime OWES the
Syrian revolutionaries the military assistance it has held back over these
years. So insofar as this funding pays for equipment that the
revolutionaries need, it should be approved.

But of course what the Syrians need is NOT "training," which they have
obtained in the course of their own struggle (plus a large part of the FSA
consists of defectors previously trained by the Syrian military). And in
the above context, I can only see "training" as meaning the formation of a
force that would be acceptable and loyal to the US, so that's even more
repugnant. But if this were to go ahead, then I'd say that any such forces
who arrive in Syria should have their equipment and weapons commandeered
for use by the revolutionary forces as a whole. And then those individuals
should be re-vetted, if you will, to see if they are really Syrian
revolutionaries or more loyal to their "trainers" before they are trusted
or given responsibilities.

Well, I didn't really have to say all that, either. Because that is
naturally what the Syrian revolutionaries would do. The idea that a country
with deep pockets can just "buy off" a popular revolution has been
dispelled, in my mind at least, by looking at the result of the Libyan
experience. I don't say that no such danger exists, but the Syrian struggle
has progressed way too far for them to be corrupted by "gifts" from the
most untrustworthy of "friends," as has been the US. 

 - Jeff

>
>Various posters to this list have been vehement in their verbal  
>support (and denunciation of those opposed) to what they are pleased  
>to designate as the "Syrian Revolution." So they each one now finally  
>has to answer the question:  There must be at least one member of  
>Congress who you might hope would at least listen to your views--so  
>what are you telling her/him to do when it comes to appropriating your  
>money? The choices are Yes, No, or Abstain.
>
>
>
>
>Shane Mage
>

Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Duplicate emails

[Jeff via Marxism]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


At 09:41 04-07-14 -0400, Louis Proyect via Marxism wrote:
>
>
>On 7/3/14 8:18 PM, martin schiller wrote:
>> when I 'reply' to a list msg, the new msg is addressed to the original
sender and the list. If an original sender is the person who reported the
problem, and is receiving duplicates of replies to his own messages, that
should be the explanation. I tend to remove the original sender address and
leave the list address when I reply.
>>
>
>Hi, Martin
>
>I am cc'ing the list on this since I too was a bit puzzled by this. It 
>turns out that there is no need to delete the sender of the email when 
>replying because it only goes to the list and not to the sender, ie. you.

Actually that is wrong (usually, at least). If someone just hits "Reply",
then the new email acquires 2 recipients in the "To:" field. One email goes
to the list server and is forwarded to the list members, and the other one
goes directly to the author of the mail that was replied to. So in this
case, Louis should be receiving TWO copies of this email, one directly from
"Jeff", and the other one as a member of the list from "Jeff via Marxism."

Actually that isn't a great problem, just a bit confusing. Normally when
replying I delete the recipient other than the list address (but didn't in
this case, as a demonstration). It happens because the "Reply-To:" field
has both addresses included. It should really only have the list address,
like it used to, before things were changed a month ago to deal with an
unrelated problem.

- Jeff

Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Duplicate emails

[Jeff via Marxism]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


At 12:03 06-07-14 -0400, you wrote:
>==
>Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
>==
>
>
>On 7/6/14 11:55 AM, Jeff wrote:
>> Actually that is wrong (usually, at least). If someone just hits "Reply",
>> then the new email acquires 2 recipients in the "To:" field. One email goes
>> to the list server and is forwarded to the list members, and the other one
>> goes directly to the author of the mail that was replied to. So in this
>> case, Louis should be receiving TWO copies of this email, one directly from
>> "Jeff", and the other one as a member of the list from "Jeff via Marxism."
>
>No.
>
>I only received one email. 

Well that's real funny, because I just got two emails from you!!

> It is a bit confusing but Mailman sorts this 
>out.

No, the mail server couldn't possibly "sort it out" because it only
received one of the emails, not the one that was sent (using the internet,
as usual) directly to the sender. I'm sure others can attest to having
received such double copies as I have described (and just received myself).

I cannot understand why Lou doesn't observe this himself. Perhaps his email
program collapses what it perceives as duplicates, though that's hard to
imagine. Or perhaps he has two different addresses and is only looking at
one. But there is no question that what I described is the case.

> The bigger problem is that sometimes when you do a "reply", the 
>list address is dropped, never the person who wrote the email. That is 
>to watch out for. Specifically, in this instance when I replied, I had 
>to add the list address

Well that has never happened to me, but is interesting. The email that I
sent out a few minutes ago includes the following header:

Reply-To: Jeff ,
Activists and scholars in Marxist tradition


Therefore if your email program is properly honoring the Reply-To header,
it should have composed an email to both addresses. But all this shows is
that email programs are not totally standardized, even dealing with plain
email. But don't imagine that everyone's system is exactly the same as
yours, or that I am just "imagining" that I get duplicate emails in the
exact way I described for the exact reason I described!

- Jeff





Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Duplicate emails

[Jeff via Marxism]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


At 12:26 06-07-14 -0400, Les Schaffer via Marxism wrote:
>
>Jeff:
>
>can you check that you do not have a double filter rule that copies the
>same message twice ... we have discovered this with two Outlook users.
>its an honest enough mistake to check once.
>
>Les

No, I'm quite sure that isn't the case and wouldn't explain exactly what I
have described. Rather, when Lou sent an email to the list (but which also
included my address) I received two similar emails, one from "Louis Proyect
via Marxism " (sent by the list, with the
added Rule #1 etc.) and one from "Louis Proyect " sent
directly by his personal email account.

Les, do you not likewise receive two copies of THIS email (which I just hit
"reply" to, thus containing both addresses), as I have described? If not,
then I am really confused. But aside from what Lou reported, it all makes
sense given the Reply-To that is generated by the list server in its latest
incarnation.

- Jeff



Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Duplicate emails

[Jeff via Marxism]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


At 12:36 06-07-14 -0400, Louis Proyect via Marxism wrote:
>
>I should add that after polling the list, the only people who reported 
>getting dupes had the Outlook problem Les alludes to.

Well I don't understand that (and I certainly don't use Outlook myself!)
but if it's not a problem to others then I'm certainly not going to waste
any time worrying about it. And I'm sorry if I wasted others' time with an
issue that, as I had said, doesn't cause any real harm to begin with.

- Jeff






Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Duplicate emails

[Jeff via Marxism]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


I said I wasn't going to worry about this (and I'm not worried). But
looking back, I see that there were two totally separate issues involved. 

>I just received this communication:
>
>Recently I have been receiving duplicates of all mailings from this list.

That must be the problem you were talking about with two filter rules, so
that EVERY email from the list gets duplicated ON HIS COMPUTER. That isn't
what I was talking about. I was talking about a totally distinct problem
which was reported under the same subject heading:

>On 7/3/14 8:18 PM, martin schiller wrote:
>> when I 'reply' to a list msg, the new msg is addressed to the original
sender and the list. If an original sender is the person who reported the
problem, and is receiving duplicates of replies to his own messages, that
should be the explanation. I tend to remove the original sender address and
leave the list address when I reply.
>>
>
>Hi, Martin

Martin's experience is exactly mine, and is why I got two emails when Lou
thought he was only posting to the list. But his email program also sent
out one directly to me (as it should have done, given the Reply-To), as did
one other post where someone responded to a post of mine. Again, I can't
understand why no one else has noticed this. But if someone is looking at
the list's email in a mailbox where all list emails are filtered into, then
that mailbox will (depending on the rule) only show the one that came from
the list, and the one sent directly might stay in the inbox, for instance.

- Jeff


>

Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Marxism] Large, militant pro-Palestine demo in The Hague

[Jeff via Marxism]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


Yesterday an estimated 3000 supporters of Palestine took to the streets of
the Hague in protest of the Israeli offensive in Gaza. I know there were
also similarly large demonstrations in other large cities including London,
Oslo, and New York of which I'm aware. But this was a particularly large
demonstration (around a non-mainstream issue) for The Netherlands, given
the generally passivity of the Dutch population. Unfortunately that was not
contradicted in this case, as it was clear from looking around the crowd
that at least 90% of the participants were not ethnic Dutch.

The demonstrators in The Hague particularly assailed the Dutch government
which has reiterated its unconditional support of Israel in the current
situation, and the public Dutch news agency NOS which has duly assisted by
acting practically as a mouthpiece for Israeli government propaganda (to my
surprise, though, the NOS TV coverage included our denunciation of their
highly biased reporting).

The protest had originally been scheduled for this date to take place at
the Peace Palace (location of the World Court) marking 10 years since the
court's ruling against Israel's apartheid wall in the West bank, at which
time we also had an action at that location. With the new war on Gaza, the
starting location was moved to a square in the city center to accommodate
the larger expected crowd, followed by a long march which passed the Peace
Palace (but we weren't allowed to stop there). 

Video of the protest (lengthy):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iVDEo0cw0hU

Article in activist media:
http://www.ravage-webzine.nl/2014/07/13/demonstratie-tegen-israelisch-oorlog
sgeweld/

- Jeff

Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Ukraine's pro-EU gov't to build out nuclear energy. What?

[Jeff via Marxism]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


Thanks for your thoughts, but I wonder if you're reading too much into
this. Perhaps this is simple-minded, but would Ukraine's turn toward
nuclear perhaps just be in response to Russia's threat to cut off the
oil/gas supplies Ukraine is dependent on? After all, Ukraine is the only
country (afaik) that Russia has cut oil supplies to (even while hosting
pipelines carrying oil further west). And given recent history, it's not
surprising they rather rely on technology from Western Europe for new
plants. And even if they continue to buy (some) nuclear fuel from Russia,
that's hardly the same as gas which can be cut off with immediate effect,
whereas I imagine a nuclear reactor would keep running for months (years?)
after a scheduled refueling were supplies lacking.

Might that not explain everything?

- Jeff

On Tue, July 15, 2014 18:12, DW via Marxism wrote:




Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Fwd: Ukraine government, Malaysia Airlines confirm passenger plane crash, at least 295 presumed dead (UPDATES, VIDEO)

[Jeff via Marxism]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


On Thu, July 17, 2014 21:33, Louis Proyect via Marxism wrote:
>
>  but this article claims that the Donetsk militia
> leader took credit for downing the airliner.

Well we may never know, but they are certainly denying it after it turned
out to be a passenger jet. And even claiming that the Ukrainian government
did it as a "false flag" operation!

But aside from such conspiracy theories, what I believe is unquestionable is:

1) No side had anything to gain (and a lot to loose) from shooting down a
third-party civilian plane.

2) Whoever shot it down, had quite advanced military hardware.

3) Therefore I would conclude that shooting down this passenger jet was a
mistake.

4) And I would further conclude that such a mistake would almost surely
have been made by a party with access to such advanced hardware but who
didn't know how to use it wisely. In other words, amateurs. I don't think
it's too hard to imagine who that would be.

- Jeff









Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Ukrainian responsibility for the mass murder

[Jeff via Marxism]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


At 03:28 20-07-14 +1000, Michael Karadjis via Marxism wrote:
>
>So of course we can, to some extent, "blame those who shot down the 
>plane" in as much as they were obviously not very careful

Well it's more like they didn't even know the meaning of "careful" in this
context. Those sorts of forces receiving such a weapon is like giving
matches and gasoline to a 4 year old: no one would be surprised if a fire
were thereby started. Weapons of this sort are normally controlled by major
militaries who also have radar, communications and transponder electronics,
and commercial flight information, so this doesn't happen. Until now.

>. But you can't really blame people getting bombed 
>from the sky for trying to shoot down the planes that bomb them. If you 
>do, then you have to agree with the shabby and transparently dishonest 
>excuse the US gives for blocking Manpads to the FSA for years - that 
>"jihadists" might get them 

But those have a much shorter range. I don't study military matters, but
from what I understand bombing is normally done from low altitudes in order
to increase target accuracy, against which the shoulder fired missiles
would be effective, and actually more portable. The "separatists" who fired
that missile surely did not think they were protecting themselves from a
bomber.

The American concern for misuse of those portable missiles has to do with
them being used closer to an airport where passenger planes are flying low.
And anyway, I'm not particularly keen to see ISIS obtain them (though I'll
concede they'd have a right to shoot at planes bombing them). But if ISIS
were to obtain these BUK missiles? Whoa.

Also, I do not think commercial airplane routes are determined the least
bit by the countries which they fly through. Except in the particular cases
of states which refuse overflight permission (as Ukraine did for flying
below 10km). So you can blame the commercial aviation industry, I guess,
except what they did was normal: balanced the conservation of fuel (costs)
against what they perceived as a very small risk. As everyone had perceived
it, until then.

- Jeff









Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Fwd: Anti-Israel protesters rally across France, defying ban imposed after synagogue clash - Diplomacy and Defense Israel News | Haaretz

[Jeff via Marxism]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


At 19:03 19-07-14 -0400, Louis Proyect via Marxism wrote:
>
>http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/1.606036

This is really great news. The French government (namely Hollande) had 
issued a ban against anti-Israel demonstrations today (in "democratic" 
France). The NPA called on people to defy the ban, and many thousands in 
Paris, Marseille and other cities came out, with street battles against the 
police and over 40 arrested. Good photo coverage in The Independent:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/tear-gas-fired-at-propalestinians-demonstrators-in-paris-9616751.html

- Jeff

Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Marxism] Better apology needed.....

[Jeff via Marxism]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


On Wed, July 23, 2014 17:17, DW via Marxism wrote:
>
> Apology to Clay for calling him a state dept socialist. This was out of
> line here

That's a good start

> and it not accurate (that positions are congruent with this or
> that Imperialist position doesn't make one a "state dept socialist")

No it wouldn't, but you are still careless in calling his words "congruent
with [an] Imperialist position." Saying which missile hit which plane is
not a "position," it is just an assessment of fact. If you count every
simple fact (say, starting with the multiplication table) then I guess you
could say that I agree with over 99% of "imperialist positions."

And finally:

On Wed, July 23, 2014 17:11, DW via Marxism wrote:
>
>
> Clay, who has become the point man for the "Russia is Evil, Ukraine Good"
> crowd of state dept type socialists here

The apology to Clay was insufficient because an entire "crowd" was
labelled "state dept type socialists." That might well include me and the
majority of this list. And furthermore, who among us exactly says "Russia
is Evil, Ukraine Good"? AFAIK everyone on this list agrees that Ukraine is
a capitalist country and people don't come to this list if they think
capitalist countries are "good."

- Jeff




Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] NATO over Libya vs. IDF over Gaza

[Jeff via Marxism]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


At 21:48 24-07-14 -0400, Marv Gandall via Marxism wrote:
>
>The NATO countries, of course, do not presently have the power to bring
the Russian leaders to trial.
>
>Instead, the US and its allies are trying to bring pressure to bear
through their control of the global financial system. The EU today adopted
tougher sanctions in line with those adopted earlier by the Obama
administration as part of a staged program designed to progressively
squeeze the Russian financial system and cripple the economy. 
>
>Do you support these efforts?

I think that is a really unfair question, because either answer is wrong.
When there is a dispute between capitalists, with no overriding principle
involved, then if you support one side you are supporting one group of
capitalists. Forcing someone to support one or the other is a trap and a
diversion from any valid issues which might be tangentially involved.
Because one country (or usually both countries) in a dispute deserves to be
punished, doesn't mean you need to endorse some particular sort of action.

And of course even our own boycott actions are just tactical, such the BDS
campaign against Israel. We don't have to answer every question about "Why
pick on Israel when this other country is doing something awful too?"
Likewise with economic sanctions which are just a tactic and don't have to
be either supported or opposed in every case. But what does become an issue
is when they go out of their way NOT to implement sanctions, such as when
Reagan came to the aid of South African apartheid by saying that sanctions
wouldn't help etc. It's clear why he was against sanctions, and that we
surely denounce.

But you can't demand from me a list of countries that do or don't deserve
sanctions. And although Russia's interference in Ukraine is contrary to the
interests and rights of Ukranians, no one has to decide whether sanctions
are "right" or "wrong," whatever those terms might mean. The main thing I
notice about sanctions against Russia, considering all that has transpired,
is that the EU countries in particular are rather reluctant to implement
very serious sanctions, because their economic interests (particularly
dependence on Russian gas/oil) are at odds with their geopolitical concerns
(losing influence in East Europe). That is a more pertinent discussion than
whether sanctions will do more harm than good, or which capitalist has the
right or moral authority to implement punishments against a different
capitalist country.

- Jeff

>
>Besides military assistance to its proxies, I assume doing the right thing
in Clay’s view also includes economic sanctions, US imperialism’s weapon of
choice for exercising control. I asked Clay about this a couple of days ago
- no response as yet - and Louis, Andy, and others who broadly agree with
Clay’s characterization of the civil war within Ukraine as “Russian
aggression” might also want to have a stab at it:


Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Stockman On Dominoes , WMDs And Putin’s “Aggression”: Imperial Washingt on Is Intoxicated By Another Big Lie

[Jeff via Marxism]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


Oh how extremely interesting: Shane has identified another
businessman/politician on the right fringe of establishment politics who
comes to the defense of Putin against the confused liberal Western
capitalists. Louis (and others) have pointed to numerous accounts of
classical fascist groups enamoured with Putin's undemocratic character and
happy to parrot his denunciation of Western imperialism. But this guy is
more in the form of Paul Craig Roberts whose views also get propagated
among the left, surely by those who, like Shane, marvel at how an
establishment "conservative" has reached supposedly "left" positions.

You'd think that when leftists keep finding such figures on the right
echoing their own talking points, that they would take a step back and try
to figure out whether the far right really "stands far to the 'left'" as
Shane innocently puts it, or whether there might be something wrong with
their own positions.

- Jeff


On Wed, July 30, 2014 18:32, Shane Mage via Marxism wrote:
>
> Stockman's is a variety of "conservatism" that, despite its
> ideological economic eccentricities, stands far to the "left" (ie., is
> clearly right) as against every variety of Liberalism or Social
> Democracy.
>
>   
> http://davidstockmanscontracorner.com/on-dominoes-wmds-and-putins-aggression-imperial-washington-is-intoxicated-in-another-big-lie/
>


Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Fwd: [Pen-l] "Joe Catron ... human shield for the El-Wafa Medical Rehabilitation Hospital in Gaza"

[Jeff via Marxism]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


This is working rather well, at least from a PR standpoint. BBC radio just
played a story of some length about the foreign human shields taking shifts
at that (and other) hospitals to discourage Israeli fire. It included a
decent interview with Joseph Catron lasting at least a couple minutes. Good
for him!

Of course the Israelis claimed ignorance when they bombed the UN school
after being notified 17 times about it, but something tells me that their
knowledge of the presence of Westerners will register a bit more concern.
Unless they decide to risk another Rachel Corrie incident, they'll have to
admit in practice their devaluation of Palestinian lives compared to real
humans.

- Jeff



Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Marxism] UK activists shut down Israeli arms factory

[Jeff via Marxism]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==



.A group of activists from the London Palestine Action network have
today (5/8/14) chained the doors shut of an Israeli weapons factory based
near Birmingham in the UK and are now occupying the roof. As part of the
boycott, divestment and sanctions movement (BDS) and in response to calls
for action from Palestinian movements, we are demanding the permanent
closure of the factory and an end to all forms of military trade and
cooperation with Israel.

http://londonpalestineaction.tumblr.com/




Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] FYI: Syrian rebel commander says he collaborated with Israel

[Jeff via Marxism]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


On Thu, August 14, 2014 16:15, Ken Hiebert via Marxism wrote:
> I received this on another list.
>ken h
>
> http://www.timesofisrael.com/syrian-rebel-commander-says-he-collaborated-with-israel/#ixzz3AJnu0EUq

This surely isn't to be taken seriously! He is in the captivity of Jabhat
al-Nusra when he made this confession, surely under duress. Of course JAN
has a motive to portray the FSA as collaborating with Israel, an
allegation which would be fatal to any Syrian revolutionary if taken
seriously. I imagine that most people in Syria would see through that, but
I wonder if this Israeli newspaper really believed it or was just content
to propagate the lie. In any case, I'd advise Ken to respond similarly to
that other list.

- Jeff



Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] The Islamic State and ground-to-air missiles

[Jeff via Marxism]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


I won't try to figure out who said what when and what they actually meant.
But maybe we can agree on the facts of the matter (or if not, seek further
evidence for discussion). There is no doubt that some Syrian
revolutionaries have had MANPADS and used them, but it also appears clear
that these must have been so few in numbers that the Syrian pilots dropping
barrel bombs had little reason to be concerned. It would have been
different if even a small portion of such weapons "missing" in Libya had
made their way to the Syrians, and there were enough Libyans who would have
been eager to supply them. So the conclusion is that the US not only didn't
act to supply MANPADS to the Syrians, but (as has been documented) actively
prevented such shipments, for the very reasons they openly offer (fear of
them landing in the hands of al-Q'aida).

And furthermore, not only were there were so few but they were delivered to
groups other than ISIS, which is why ISIS apparently never possessed any,
and which therefore is why we haven't seen them used in Iraq. I believe
that was the point Louis was making.

- Jeff

At 16:10 17-08-14 -0700, DW via Marxism wrote:
>
>Louis:
>"...isn't it odd that not a single one of these weapons have been used
>against jets and helicopters in Iraq?"
>
>Then you wrote:
>"Except that this is not what I said. I said that there is no evidence that
>a "rat line" existed."
>
>Then I wrote these weapons being...MANPADS. I showed you are wrong and
>factually inaccurate about what you in fact wrote.
>
>David

Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] The Islamic State and ground-to-air missiles

[Jeff via Marxism]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


At 10:11 18-08-14 +1000, Michael Karadjis via Marxism wrote:
> agree none went to ISIS, but even 
>though Jeff righty says the US "actively prevented" any Manpads getting 
>in, he then seems to suggest that some may have let through to the FSA - 
>if so, I disagree with the implication that any at all were.

No, you're probably right. I didn't want to rule it out because there are
accounts of them having been used. But I guess  they could all have been
raided from the regime, as Michael says. 

>I also don't buy that the US aim in preventing Manpads and other 
>advanced weapons getting in was to ensure none got to al-Qaida. I 
>believe the aim was to ensure that none got to al-Qaida, none got to any 
>Islamists, no matter how moderate, and none got to secular FSA

Well I think that describes Obama, among many others. But given all the
(changing) shades of opinion among US politicians, I think the uniting
concern was preventing "proliferation" of weapons that could be used for
"terrorism." Because they agreed on that bottom line, doesn't mean that
there weren't other reasons that they denied aid to the FSA (which
obviously wouldn't have used them for terrorism nor supplied them to ISIS).

- Jeff





Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Aug. 19: Associated Press: "New Report Warns of Anti Aircraft Weaspons in Syria"

[Jeff via Marxism]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


On Tue, August 19, 2014 15:40, DW via Marxism wrote:

> http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_SYRIA_AIRCRAFT_THREATS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

This information is a small subset of a rather detailed report from the
"Small Arms Survey" (geez, I never would have considered anti-aircraft
missiles as "small arms"!) I found after a few clicks at:

http://www.smallarmssurvey.org/fileadmin/docs/G-Issue-briefs/SAS-IB9%20-MANPADS-and-Syria.pdf

It admits that it cannot quantify the number of MANPADS in Syrian
revolutionary hands, but implies that it appears rather significant except
that the majority of the ones seized from the government are duds. It does
list at least 5 different models which have been confirmed to be among
those in rebel hands. Not surprising to anyone on this list, it points
out:

Contrary to repeated claims by the
media and the Russian government,
there is no evidence that armed
groups in Syria have acquired USdesigned
FIM-92 Stinger MANPADS.
The reports appeared regularly in
media articles in 2012, culminating in
claims by a high-ranking Russian
official that Syrian armed groups had
acquired several dozen Stinger missiles
(AFP, 2012; RIA Novosti, 2012a;
MFA, 2012).5 
An analysis of videos and photographs
from Syria yielded no
evidence of acquisition or use of
Stinger MANPADS by armed groups.
The Russian government has not
released photographs or other hard
evidence to support their claims, and
the only photo accompanying media
reports of ‘Stingers’ in Syria is of
another type of missile misidentified
as a Stinger (Hughes, 2012).7

But it does discuss the possible actors in external deliveries of MANPADS
(such as Qatar) and the likelihood of ones which had been liberated in
Libya which is not surprising. Regardless of Syria, I was a bit shocked to
learn that altogether a million MANPADS have been produced, each capable
of bringing down a passenger airplane. If ISIS (along with their
international network) were to get a hold of a number of these, it would
appear that they could practically bring civilian air travel to a halt!

- Jeff








Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] One in six French people say they support ISIS

[Jeff via Marxism]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


Well the original poll was taken a month and a half ago, and the raw data
is reported here:

http://www.icmresearch.com/data/media/pdf/New-EU-Comb.pdf

But I agree with Clay, that these numbers are beyond belief. I suspect the
results may have been contaminated by people who didn't even know what they
were being questioned about and were too ashamed to admit that (as 20-30%
did admit, in the bottom row) and just made a random guess. I think a
proper poll should have first ascertained whether a respondent follows news
from the Middle East (though of course the form of that determination would
likewise bias any poll which restricted the sample base). But if anything
like that proportion of people in any European country (or elsewhere)
really supported ISIS, then I have totally misread the political landscape
and would be stunned.

- Jeff



At 10:58 01-09-14 -0500, you wrote:
>===
>
>I tend not to trust polls because they can so easily be skewed.>

Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] TODAY: Tell Mahmoud Abbas, Stop Collaborating with Israeli War Crimes! 5:15 Cooper Union, NYC

[Jeff via Marxism]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


At 12:20 22-09-14 -0400, A.R. G via Marxism wrote:
>
>https://www.facebook.com/events/348102545364426/

You sent this call 3 times and I'm left a bit bewildered. Of course Israel
(or actually, specific Israelis) should be prosecuted by the ICC for war
crimes, or Israel taken to the ICJ as I understand is made possible by the
(partial) recognition of Palestine by the U.N. which the PA could
undertake. But the above link shows a demo with signs saying "Dissolve the
Palestinian Authority" which is a strange demand if there isn't something
to replace it with. Of course politically the PA has been an instrument of
Fateh and (mis-)led by Abbas, but there was supposed to be a reconciliation
with Hamas, and moreover according to its own procedures, his term of
presidency ended a long time ago and there should be new elections (Hamas
came out ahead in the last election, but was prevented from executing its
mandate). So Abbas should be replaced BY THE PALESTINIANS (it's not clear
that this event is even led by Palestinians, let alone ones with popular
representation among the Palestinian nation).

But above all, I cannot see just demanding "Dissolve the Palestinian
Authority." I wouldn't shout out such a demand in relation to ANY
government of an oppressed people except in the context of its realistic
replacement by a progressive alternative. And the demand should come FROM
those people. I share many/most Palestinians frustration with the
collaborationist PA, but the approach of this action in New York is quite
questionable.

- Jeff


>
>TELL PALESTINIAN PRESIDENT MAHMOUD ABBAS:
>STOP COLLABORATING WITH ISRAELI WAR CRIMES!
>SEND ISRAEL TO THE ICC!
>
>While Israel bombs hospitals and schools in Gaza with your tax dollars,
>Palestinian leaders fail to hold them accountable and in fact have been
>negotiating away Palestinian rights.
>
>Join us on Monday, September 22nd at 5:15PM to tell Mahmoud Abbas, ENOUGH
>IS ENOUGH.
>
>Send Israel's war criminal leadership to the International Criminal Court!
>
>*We will be meeting at Great Hall at COOPER UNION, 7th ST BETWEEN 3rd & 4th
>AVE, AT 5:15PM, before Abbas' speech.*
>Bring signs, flags, and friends!
>
>To endorse this event, contact stopcollaborat...@gmail.com

Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu

[Jeff via Marxism]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


At 13:01 24-09-14 -0500, Clay Claiborne via Marxism wrote:
>
>Well, I've
only heard of one FSA soldier eating his enemy's liver or heart.
>How about
you? Doesn't that make it a "rare exception" to use your happy
>phrase?

Exactly. As much as that one incident has been repeated in order to paint
the "moderate" (geez, I hate that term!) opposition as violators of human
rights, you have to wonder why they always point to the same single (and
unique) incident if it were really part of a pattern. And as for the act of
eating a human heart itself, I still have to wonder what level of crime is
involved given that it was taken from a dead man. I guess it's considered
"extreme," but a war crime? When I first heard that story I remember I was
disgusted and sickened: how could someone put such a thing in their mouth??
I was grossed out, and didn't think I could ever bring myself to do such a
thing for the cause (even if it had been a good idea). Only later did I
appreciate that it also involved desecration of a human body which is
universally frowned upon. Yet in any war there are a huge number of bodies
which don't get a "decent burial" in addition to ones that are deliberately
abused.

Well I suppose everyone has their priorities. But for me, I'd much prefer
to know that my heart would get eaten or any other disgusting thing happen
to my body after I was already dead, compared to having one fingernail
pulled out or one bone broken. This one "FSA war crime" just has  me
yawning..

- Jeff



Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu

[Jeff via Marxism]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


On Fri, September 26, 2014 19:45, Joseph Catron via Marxism wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 6:41 AM, Louis Proyect via Marxism <
> marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu> wrote:
>
> Well, according to Joseph Catron, Robert Fisk, Tariq Ali, Phyllis Bennis,
>> Yoshie Furuhashi, Press TV, RT.com, WSWS.org, the PSL, the WWP,
>> Counterfire, Global Research and Moon of Alabama biting a dead man's
>> heart
>> is worse than napalming schoolchildren.
>
>
> Lou, you really shouldn't keep lying and falsely attributing statements to
> others.

Well you're right, that Louis often speaks sharply for effect without
spelling out the point in a way that's literally accurate in detail. So
for those of you who are unable to digest his sort of exposition, let me
translate the above quote:

"Judging only by the emphasis given in their reporting of various
atrocities, one would conclude that Joseph Catron, Robert Fisk, Tariq Ali,
Phyllis Bennis, Yoshie Furuhashi, Press TV, RT.com, WSWS.org, the PSL, the
WWP, Counterfire, Global Research and Moon of Alabama consider biting a
dead man's heart to be worse than napalming schoolchildren.

Get it?

- Jeff




Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu

[Jeff via Marxism]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


I'd like to be clear that I have great respect for Joseph Catron's work in
Gaza on behalf of Palestine. That wasn't in question. But the issue
involved Syria, where many leftists who genuinely support the Palestinian
struggle have wound up supporting the counter-revolution, some actively by
allying themselves with Assad, and others just by disparaging the rebels
to the point that the would lose support. My point isn't to paint these
leftists as enemies but to neutralize their damage to the revolution, and
hope they would come their senses.

- Jeff



On Fri, September 26, 2014 20:22, Joseph Catron via Marxism wrote:
>
>
> Yes, I get that Jeff is just as dishonest as Lou, and probably more so.
> (We
> could chalk Lou's false claims up to sloppy carelessness, but I don't know
> what excuses can be made for Jeff's careful wording.)
>
> I normally refrain from vanity posts, but since Jeff has chosen to make a
> point of it, here is the sum total of my reportage over the past month:
>
>- Local rights groups still documenting toll of Israel's Gaza offensive
>
> 
>- Israel forces Gaza fishermen to undress in attack violating ceasefire
>deal
>
> 
>- Israel tortures prisoners captured in Gaza invasion
>
> 
>- Gaza beach massacre commemorated by child survivors
>
> 
>- Tens of thousands remain homeless in Gaza
>
> 
>- "These are war crimes," says father of Gaza family wiped out by
>Israeli airstrike
>
> 
>
> A good sampling of earlier stuff can be found here:
>
>- Electronic Intifada 
>- Middle East Eye 
>
> Of course I realize that Jeff, a measured and deliberate liar, won't care.
> I post this only for the benefit of others, who may have lingering doubts
> about his dishonesty.


Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Fwd: British hostage Alan Henning aimed to help Syrians

[Jeff via Marxism]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


At 08:28 04-10-14 -0400, Louis Proyect via Marxism wrote:
>
>The fucking ISIS is 10 times worse than the Khmer Rouge. They just 
>beheaded a British cab driver named Alan Henning who had joined a 
>caravan delivering medicine

No shit! Not just him, but I believe every high-profile beheading video 
released by ISIS or their forerunners (which "mainstream" al-Q'aida, to 
their credit, never endorsed) has been of a totally innocent civilian 
involved in reporting from or providing aid in areas of suffering. 
Absolutely no attempt to "punish" the guilty (even if beheading were an 
acceptable punishment for war criminals), but designed to shock and polarize 
-- successfully! -- amounting to nothing less than "terrorism," a term I 
very much avoid using.

Now, I understand all the reasons to oppose or question the motivations of 
the U.S. bombing campaign. But when I hear something like "Obama never even 
tried to negotiate with ISIS and see what their legitimate grievances are," 
I just shake my head in dismay. Seldom would I defend Obama et. al. against 
"unfair criticism" but that would have to be one. If anyone were to have 
given Obama a credible excuse to exercise military power, ISIS has succeeded.

In the case of the second American recently beheaded, Steven Sotloff, even I 
had thought that ISIS would show some moderation after the conciliatory, 
almost grovelling message by his mother, pointing out her son's pursuit in 
reporting on the suffering of Muslims: her pleas were totally ignored. I'm 
sure that one could find similar documentation for each of these beheading 
victims, but here is the last recorded interview of James Foley, beheaded by 
ISIS in August after having been captured (by whom isn't clear) in 2012. A 
previous post on this list indirectly pointed to this 4 minute video which 
is especially worth watching by anyone who might be imagining that there 
could have been a reasonable justification for his capture, let alone 
beheading.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=KOckTZHiK20

And if all that isn't enough, you might have noticed a few links (depending 
on YouTube's random choices) to "related videos" denouncing the beheading 
video as a "fake!" For the conspiratorial left/right, being "anti-war" means 
defying reason to whatever extent necessary. Note that they don't try to 
defend ISIS which they also claim was created by the US (etc. etc.) but 
rather assert that the whole scenario has been staged-managed (just like the 
collapse of the World Trade Center!). If you search you can find dozens 
(actually it says "about 11,400 results") conspiracist claims which 
conveniently deny ISIS's crime:

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=James+Foley+fake

- Jeff


>http://bigstory.ap.org/article/c5e4b7cd3b6f402fbf0e96afdf54d8a1/british-hostage-alan-henning-aimed-help-syrians


Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Fwd: British hostage Alan Henning aimed to helpSyrians

[Jeff via Marxism]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


At 15:02 05-10-14 +, Charles Faulkner via Marxism wrote:
>
>"As for the Khmer Rouge, while I don't defend them, I do think they got a
bad rap." 
>
>i can't join you here clay. 

Well me neither. But more to the point, I don't think that in all of human
history, any person or group accused of mass murder or human rights
violations has received a "bad rap," unless said actions never really
occurred or did not take place through their voluntary actions. Period.

Lou wrote "The fucking ISIS is 10 times worse than the Khmer Rouge" for
effect, or to indicate the extent of his disgust (which I share). It was
certainly NOT the result of a calculation where two numbers were divided to
obtain a ratio of 10:1, and indeed there is no such calculation possible.
Otherwise I could probably take over Mark Regev's job and point out that
the number of Palestinians killed by Israel is much less than 1% of the
Jews killed in the holocaust. What political message does one take away
from that very valid calculation? And what point is there in such
comparisons being "debated" among those of us who fight against all these
atrocities?

If someone on this list wants to actually defend any of these murderers,
then we have the basis for a debate. Otherwise I am content to accept that
Lou feels ten times more disgust at some recent events compared to distant
memories from 40 years ago, and most of us do as well because of the way
the human mind works. Any further attempt to objectively quantify the
magnitude of suffering or injustice throughout history is hogwash.

- Jeff





Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Marxism] NYT: Opposition in Syria Is Skeptical of U.S. Airstrikes on ISIS

[Jeff via Marxism]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


This is from over a week ago, but I hadn't seen it posted on this list. It
reiterates what we have already learned.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/30/world/middleeast/opposition-in-syria-is-skeptical-of-strikes.html

Opposition in Syria Is Skeptical of U.S. Airstrikes on ISIS
By ANNE BARNARD SEPT. 29, 2014

BEIRUT, Lebanon — Across insurgent-held Syria over the past week, images
have proliferated of protesters burning American flags, calling President
Obama “the enemy of God,” and declaring that the American-led airstrikes
against the Islamic State extremist group are helping the government of
President Bashar al-Assad.

“America became the arm of Bashar the terrorist,” read a sign held by a
child in Kafr Daryan, in Idlib Province, in one of the dozens of protests
that Syrians filmed and uploaded to the Internet.

Some of the protesters are Islamic State supporters carrying its black
flag, though in Raqqa, the northeastern city long run by the group, those
demonstrations have grown smaller and smaller as the attacks have
proceeded, with many residents relieved to see the extremists on the run.

The way the strikes are being carried out has deepened suspicions that the
United States has abandoned the goal of ousting Mr. Assad, according to
several rebel commanders who have received financing from the United
States, diplomats in touch with insurgents and activists, as well as
dozens of residents of opposition-held areas inside Syria who were
interviewed by telephone or electronic messaging.

And on Tuesday, Mr. Assad’s foreign minister, Walid al-Moallem, told The
Associated Press that the government was “O.K.” with the attacks.

The Assad opponents said they were troubled by reports of civilian
casualties, and by the targets the United States has struck, including
several headquarters and commanders of the Nusra Front, an insurgent group
not previously advertised as a target, deep inside territory it shared
with other anti-Islamic State insurgents in Idlib Province. While the
United States lists the Nusra Front, an affiliate of Al Qaeda, as a
terrorist organization, it is considered a tactical ally by many Syrian
rebels, including some of those the United States has deemed worthy of
support.

There are also complaints about what has not been struck. In northern
Aleppo Province, Islamic State militants have been carrying out a weeklong
assault on a Kurdish area, where residents have pleaded for military aid.

Four American airstrikes have hit the Islamic State in the area, but
Kurdish fighters say they need more help. On Tuesday, residents continued
to flee into Turkey as the Islamic State bombarded the area’s main town,
Kobani, or Ain al-Arab, and stray shells sailed across the Turkish border.

“We wouldn’t have had to leave if the Americans hit ISIS,” said Mustafa
Sheikho, who fled Shukur, a village 43 miles south of the border, and
walked to Turkey with his family without food, since they had no time to
pack any.

Given the suspicions of antigovernment Syrians, American strikes should
have focused strictly on the Islamic State, said Mohammed Ghanem, a Syrian
opposition activist now working for the Syrian American Coalition, a group
that has lobbied for American intervention against Mr. Assad.

“You rout ISIS, establish good will, create trust, and then, working with
the opposition, you go after Nusra,” he said.

“We are troubled by the expansion of scope of the campaign,” he added.
“Hitting deep inside rebel territory without prior coordination or
discussion with armed opposition or civilian opposition is frankly causing
considerable harm to the purpose of this mission.”

Diplomats, aid workers and others who have long followed the conflict say
they are perplexed that the United States would veer to targets other than
the widely despised Islamic State on the very first day of the campaign.

At the same time, the many protests in support of Nusra after the strikes
have undercut American efforts to portray other insurgents as moderate.
Anger over the attacks has also appeared to increase public support for
the Islamic State.

“God, Syria and the Islamic State,” protesters chanted in western Aleppo
Province on Friday, replacing a chant from earlier in the uprising, “God,
Syria and freedom.”

American military officials say that the majority of the airstrikes have
been carried out against the Islamic State in eastern Syria and that
precautions have been taken to avoid hitting civilians or civilian
infrastructure.

“Our assessment is that sentiments are mixed among local Syrians regarding
airstrikes, with as many supporting airstrikes and hoping for their
expansion as there are those potentially opposed,” said Col. Patrick
Ryder, a spokesman for United States Central Command. He added that
reports o

Re: [Marxism] Fwd: Libeling a Democracy Movement » CounterPunch: Tells the Facts, Names the Names

[Jeff via Marxism]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


On Mon, October 6, 2014 17:07, Louis Proyect via Marxism wrote:
>
> Dave Lindorff takes on the Global Research spy-versus-spy bullshit about
> the NED. Too bad he never saw fit to understand Syria and Ukraine in the
> same terms.

Apparently he noticed that contradiction and changed the name of his
article! So you need to use this URL instead:

http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/10/06/whats-driving-the-hong-kong-protests/

Or you can also go to the original (wrong) URL and read Mike Whitney's
latest wisdom 

>
> http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/10/06/libeling-a-democracy-movement/

- Jeff



Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Truth (aka gaffe) from Joe Biden

[Jeff via Marxism]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


On Tue, October 7, 2014 17:01, Shane Mage via Marxism wrote:
>
> We have seen here repeated claims that the rrrevolutionaries in Syria
> never received any significant outside assistance.

No that hasn't been claimed, which is why Biden's remarks are not breaking
news (to anyone but Shane). What has been claimed is that few or no actual
WEAPONS have been sent to them by the US despite earlier suggestions that
had the Syrian National Council, for instance, wasting their time (and
reputation) in pursuit of what they had been been led to expect. The big
chance that the FSA had to receive US weapons was last year when it would
have been under the condition of fighting al-Nusra on behalf of the US
which they rightfully refused.

Nor is it news that Turkey and several Arab states and private doners have
given relatively large amounts of aid. That aid went largely not to the
secular forces but "moderate" Islamic currents (but ones very much
carrying out the revolution, unlike ISIS), which further tilted the
balance in that direction and away from forces that might be viewed as
"left" or "democratic". So that has made it more difficult to convince
leftists and liberals in the West to support their revolution but hasn't
made the revolution any less valid. Most all of those forces are still
committed to democratic principles and pluralism. But like in Libya, where
the international left overwhelmingly abandoned the revolution at the
first sight of a NATO bomber, the left in Syria will have suffered from
our neglect, and I am quite sure will not be the leading party in the
first free election to take place in Syria.

- Jeff

P.S. I recommend reading "Why Does the Free Syrian Army Hate Us?" just
posted on this list by Michael Karadjis.


> So when someone
> with total access to the truth slips up and blurts it out, we might as
> well take notice:
>
> "The latest furor started after he spoke at Harvard University’s John
> F. Kennedy School of Government last Thursday. Mr. Biden said American
> allies including Turkey, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates had
> extended unconditional financial and logistical support to Sunni
> fighters trying to oust the Syrian government of President Bashar al-
> Assad.
>
> 'Our allies poured hundreds of millions of dollars and tens of
> thousands of tons of weapons into anyone who would fight against al-
> Assad,' he said, including jihadists planning to join the Nusra Front
> and Al Qaeda.
>
> Mr. Biden also confided that Turkey’s “President Erdogan told me — he
> is an old friend — ‘You were right. We let too many people
> through.'"  (NYT, 7/10)


Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Turkish anarchists and other leftists fighting ISIS

[Jeff via Marxism]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


On Tue, October 7, 2014 22:50, Joseph Catron via Marxism wrote:
>
> Following recent discussion of YPG, it's interesting that anarchists and
> other leftists from Turkey are supporting it by sending fighters to
> Kobane

Yes, it's encouraging to see that at least in that region, leftists are
actually engaging in struggle as demanded by the dire situation rather
than washing their hands of any "impure" involvement in a messy 4-way war.

>From an anarchist list I was directed to this inspiring page over the
Kurdish women fighters of the YPJ (women's division of the YPG, loosely
allied with the PKK):

http://karakok.wordpress.com/2014/10/06/these-remarkable-women-are-fighting-isis-its-time-you-know-who-they-are/




Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] UNC professor says black holes can't exist

[Jeff via Marxism]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


Wait! I just discovered Shane's qualifications for rejecting established
physics! You can't find that by reading his posts, but rather one of his
rotating sigs:

On Mon, October 6, 2014 17:45, Shane Mage via Marxism wrote:
>
>
> Shane Mage
>
> "scientific discovery is basically recognition of obvious realities
> that self-interest or ideology have kept everybody from paying
> attention to"

And to think I spent all those years studying science, when all I needed
to do was abandon ideology and renounce self-interest

- Jeff




Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] UNC professor says black holes can't exist

[Jeff via Marxism]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


On Wed, October 8, 2014 23:59, Shane Mage via Marxism wrote:
>
> It is, of course, impossible to OBSERVE something that by definition
> emits and can emit no radiation of any sort.

Many things are observed but not directly SEEN. For instance, of all of
the hundreds of extrasolar planets that have OBSERVED, not one has been
SEEN through direct detection of its light. Black holes in fact are
observed using light, but light caused by the infalling matter,
accelerated to relativistic velocities by the black hole's enormous
gravitational field. Moreover they are observed, and their mass estimated,
by observation of stars in close orbits around them: from the orbital
velocity of objects in orbit around a star (or other massive object) at a
given distance, the mass of the star can be calculated (that's how we know
the mass of the sun). I haven't watched it myself, but here is a video
about the determination of the mass of the black hole at the center of our
own galaxy:

http://www.eso.org/public/videos/eso0846b/

- Jeff




Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Bill Maher Isn�t the Only One Who Misunderstands Religion

[Jeff via Marxism]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


At 09:07 10-10-14 -0400, Louis Proyect via Marxism wrote:
>
>NY Times, Oct. 10 2014
>Bill Maher Isn’t the Only One Who Misunderstands Religion
>By REZA ASLAN

Well I don't know anything about Bill Maher, but this essay is right on the
mark! I was nodding along with every sentence as I kept reading:
>
>The abiding nature of scripture rests not so much in its truth claims as 
>it does in its malleability, its ability to be molded and shaped into 
>whatever form a worshiper requires.

and suddenly realized that this sentence applies equally well to Marxism.
Ouch.

- Jeff



Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Marxism] Turkish anarchists in defense of Kobane

[Jeff via Marxism]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


The message below is from an anarchist list and is obviously copied from a 
webpage, but I couldn't (easily) locate that page so I'm just forwarding the 
text. I don't know if their direct support in Kobane is very substantial or 
more token, but in either case it is an admirable example of solidarity and 
internationalism, especially coming from within the country most infamous for 
its oppression of the Kurdish minority and military conflict in Kurdistan.

To me at least, one interesting point discussed is under "Prison conversion" 
below, where it mentions that Ocalan has in recent years become a convert to 
the ideas of Murray Bookchin, which is quite a shift from the original PKK's 
left-Stalinist ideology. This (as implied below) has everything to do with the 
alliance between his supporters (YPG) and Turkish (and Syrian?) anarchists. 
Beginning with the Spanish civil war, Stalinist groups generally treat 
anarchists as they would Trotskyists or any other independent left current 
having its own program and world view, so the PKK's apparent evolution has made 
possible the coming together of left currents in defense of the ISIS onslaught 
against the Kurds.

It remains unfortunate that the FSA and other Syrian revolutionary currents are 
primarily nationalist in outlook and therefore cannot think in terms of Kurdish 
self-determination as that would threaten the current borders of Syria. I take 
hope, as Michael Karadjis has just posted, that facts on the ground will 
continue to bring together these forces in joint action and promote better 
understanding, and eventually a common front against Assad.

- Jeff

_

Turkish anarchists, who made headlines around the world during the battle for 
Taksim 
Square, have decamped to the besieged Kurdish town of Kobani to support the 
fight against 
the Islamic State.  While Turkish security forces look on from across the 
border as 
the Islamic State continues its onslaught against Kobani, a group of Turkish 
activists 
have crossed the border to support the Kurds.  They call themselves 
Devrimci Anarsist 
Faaliyet (Revolutionary Anarchist Action), and their members were on the 
barricades last 
year when major protests erupted around Taksim Square and Gezi park in 
Istanbul.  
Speaking to Channel 4 News, the group reveals it has visited Kobani on three 
occasions, 
bypassing Turkish border guards and helping Kurdish refugees to escape into 
Turkey.

We were part of the resistance that started in Taksim and Gezi park.

Turkish anarchist spokesperson

"The most important task was to help civilians from Kobani to pass through the 
border. 
After that we supported immigrants for transportation, setting up tents, 
organising the 
distribution of materials sent in solidarity," one group member explained.

"We were part of the resistance that started in Taksim Gezi park. We were part 
of the 
resistance against police violence, against state terrorism and in the direct 
democracy 
experience afterwards."

"After Taksim Square was occupied, we have actively participated in resistance 
along the 
barricades and behind the barricades. However we have to make this clear: we 
are not only 
in the streets when the turmoil in society is high."

Read more: Kurdish spring: what are the PKK fighting for?

Image credit DAF

Prison conversion

The links between Kurdish groups and anarchists were born from the proscribed 
PKK 
(Kurdistan Workers Party) leader Abdullah Ocalan's prison conversion to the 
writings of 
Murray Bookchin, a New York anarchist academic.

In Kobani the PYD (Democratic Union Party) and its armed wing, the YPG, are 
followers of 
Ocalan, and have attempted to implement an autonomous form of Kurdish direct 
democracy. 
Turkish radicals are hoping to learn from this experience.

"YPG is organising the fight at the highest level against Isis as a 
self-defence force. So 
we are trying to support in every way possible," the anarchist explained.

Protest calls

The border near Kobani has seen violent scenes as Turkish forces attempt to 
control the 
flow of refugees both into Turkey and back to Syria.

In recent days the DAF have been supporting calls for people to come onto the 
streets to 
protest against the Turkish government's stance on Syria.

Police have used tear gas and water cannon this week as unrest spread to six 
Turkish 
cities over Turkey's lack of action against IS.

One 25-year-old protester was killed in the eastern province of Mus and there 
were other 
deaths reported in Diyarbakir, Turkey's largest Kurdish city.


Image credit DAF

Peace process threatened

The activists worry that the government is not taking the ongoing and currently 
quite 
delicate peace process with the 

Re: [Marxism] Moderators' note: posting under your real name

[Jeff via Marxism]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.

!!! NOTE: this mail list is publicly archived at the U of Utah. Posts submitted 
under your real name and archived there can NOT be deleted from the server.!!!
==


At 10:50 17-10-14 -0400, Les Schaffer via Marxism wrote:
>
>You should not post to marxmail using your real name if you are
>concerned 

Alright, but why don't you just change the header message to simply say
that, rather than jumping to the (non-) possibility of correcting such an
error after it's too late? As a moderator you are instead thinking about
the aspect of the problem which you (formerly) could control. And even then
one should know that anything that ever appears on the public web will
exist in perpetuity, even if removed (for instance, as archived on the Way
Back Machine and elsewhere). Keep that annoying message at the top to the
point and minimally obtrusive (or my preference: put it at the bottom!).

- Jeff


about various people and organizations seeking and finding
>such posts on the web. Our email list is archived at the U of Utah,
>GMANE, mail-archive.com, and probably several others i cannot think of
>at the moment. Because our host server at U of Utah is no longer under
>our direct control, we have no easy way to remove posts that appear
>there. So to convince people that they should sub under a fake name if
>they want to avoid name <==> marxism linkage, we have added a warning to
>our top header.
>
>enjoy
>
>Les


Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Moderators' note: posting under your real name

[Jeff via Marxism]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.

!!! NOTE: this mail list is publicly archived at the U of Utah. Posts submitted 
under your real name and archived there can NOT be deleted from the server.!!!
==


At 13:18 17-10-14 -0400, Les Schaffer via Marxism wrote:
>... we just want people to stop asking
>us to pull there posts because of the issue.

Oh, is that your only motivation? Geez, how many of these requests do you
get every day? I guess you could send them all a form letter or something

>but if you have a snappy way to say it, by all means pitch it

Alright:

 ==
1) When replying to a message always clip extraneous text
2) Your name and email address will appear on the web. Consider using an
alias.
==

- Jeff




Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Moderators' note: posting under your real name

[Jeff via Marxism]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.

!!! NOTE: this mail list is publicly archived at the U of Utah. Posts submitted 
under your real name and archived there can NOT be deleted from the server.!!!
==



Again, THAT ^

versus:


1) When replying to a message always clip extraneous text
2) Your name and email address will appear on the web. Consider using an alias.



Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Moderators' note: posting under your real name

[Jeff via Marxism]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.

!!! NOTE: this mail list is publicly archived at the U of Utah. Posts submitted 
under your real name and archived there can NOT be deleted from the server.!!!
==


At 13:59 17-10-14 -0400, you wrote:
>
>i like the asterisks... trying to decide if i should go with some of
>Joseph's generality about posting and archiving

How about the message at the bottom point to a page called "List rules and
cautions". In fact that could replace "Send list submissions to:
Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu" which is a rather useless instruction (most
people just hit "Reply") and could be included in the page pointed to.

- Jeff




Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Moderators' note: posting under your real name

[Jeff via Marxism]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.

!!! NOTE: this mail list is publicly archived at the U of Utah. Posts submitted 
under your real name and archived there can NOT be deleted from the server.!!!
==


At 14:17 17-10-14 -0400, Les Schaffer via Marxism wrote:
>
>On 10/17/2014 02:10 PM, Jeff via Marxism wrote:
>> How about the message at the bottom point to a page called "List rules
>> and cautions". 
>
>yep, thought of that too. up top is more in your face...

But my point was to include the two-line less obtrusive version of the 
caution at the top (if you think that's necessary, in order to be "in your 
face"), but write up a more complete caution, along with other list rules 
and advice that you can't possibly include in each email, and post that on a 
webpage. And then at the bottom it would say:

___
List rules and information: http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/marxism/Rules.html
Set your options at: http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/

instead of:


Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Moderators' note: posting under your real name

[Jeff via Marxism]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.

!!! NOTE: this mail list is publicly archived at the U of Utah. Posts submitted 
under your real name and archived there can NOT be deleted from the server.!!!
==


One more thought:

The caution about not using your real name if you don't want it on the web,
doesn't really need to be told to each person each time they're posting
(let alone each time they're just reading the messages!). And after they've
ignored it once, then it's already sort of too late.

Now, I'm pretty sure that with this list, like most lists, the very first
time a new subscriber posts, that post is automatically moderated. That
helps to prevent a spammer from easily getting on the list and spamming
right away. So do it like this: when you get that first post from a new
subscriber, routinely hold it back and send them an email pointing out
these issues (and other list rules). Then they can still reconsider before
posting it again for real. How about that?

- Jeff



Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Fwd: Escape from Microsoft Word by Edward Mendelson | NYRblog | The New York Review of Books

[Jeff via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

At 16:15 21-10-14 -0400, Louis Proyect via Marxism wrote:
>
>http://www.nybooks.com/blogs/nyrblog/2014/oct/21/escape-microsoft-word/

Well I'd have so many things to say about Microsoft Word (and the .doc format 
that they have forced on most of the world) that I realized this would be a 
long, angry message were I to get started. So I'll just mention possibly the 
most annoying component of Microsoft Word/Office, the fuckin' PAPERCLIP:

http://gallery.future-i.com/comedy/pic:damnpaperclip/full/assistant.gif
http://www.rdex.net/anim_gifs/gifs/assistant.gif
http://img1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20100312214553/uncyclopedia/images/1/19/Clippy_evil.png



_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Ebola and the Western powers

[Jeff via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

At 15:59 22-10-14 +1300, Philip Ferguson via Marxism wrote:
>
>While it's horrible that anyone is dying form Ebola, it's a bit strange
>that western media are so focused on it,

While all of us like to find politically-motivated imbalances in the media or 
government propaganda, I could not disagree more with the above statement, and 
the rest of the article that attempts to support that thesis. If I needed to 
criticize the media and response of the international community, it would have 
to be that it had taken much too long for them to come to terms with the 
magnitude of the crisis. Arguably the Western media's response was accelerated 
by a handful of cases in America and Europe, but it was still too little too 
late.

The bar graph in the article showing the relative death toll between ebola and 
other diseases in Africa is extremely misleading for reasons I will lay out. If 
it were the result of an intentional campaign to reduce resources addressing 
the epidemic then I would even call it criminal. It would be like Hitler 
displaying a graph comparing the total number of deaths in the world in 1944 
with the relatively small number of Jews who "died" in concentration camps.

1) First, like any such comparison, it compares a large number of deaths with a 
much larger numbers while avoiding the main conclusion: that almost all of the 
deaths from HIV, malaria, hunger, TB, and syphilis are avoidable and shouldn't 
be offered as an excuse for one single avoidable death. For instance, I 
protested the execution of Ken Saro-Wiwa without comparing that death toll (9) 
with the other death tolls in Nigeria such as presented in this graph, for 
which I don't apologize.

2) The graph is somewhat misleading (and this relates to point (3)) because it 
accumulates all the deaths over the last 7 months whereas half of the ebola 
deaths have been in the last month, so a fair graph showing the numbers over 
the last month would show only about 1/4 the disparity displayed.

3) But most of all, the graph and entire article seems impervious to the fact 
of exponential growth of ebola (whereas the other death rates displayed are 
more or less stable). The incidence and death rate of ebola is doubling every 
month! That means that the same graph plotted next summer would show ebola 
exceeding all the other deaths in Africa. But that's just for starters. At the 
current rate of increase, in just about two years the ENTIRE HUMAN RACE would 
be DEAD. Does that concern anyone? Anyone? 

For reference, here are graphs showing that exponential growth:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ebola_virus_epidemic_in_West_Africa#Timeline_of_cases_and_deaths
http://news.sciencemag.org/health/2014/10/how-many-ebola-cases-are-there-really

This isn't my field, but I'm pretty sure that there has never in recorded 
history been a widespread epidemic with any similar rate of exponential growth. 
Never had the human race only two years left if current rates of infection 
continued. And although the spread of ebola (like any disease) can in principle 
be turned around (so that the exponential growth becomes exponential decay), 
this hasn't yet happened in countries where it became widespread EVEN THOUGH 
people are aware of the dangers and reducing their exposure.

Unlike HIV or TB, normal infection control measures are insufficient, as the 
continued exponential growth rate indicates. With many hundreds of specialized 
medical workers in space suits (some of whom still get infected), the care 
provided is wholly insufficient. With the growth rate of the epidemic, the 
number of such medical workers would have to more than double every month in 
order ever come to grips with the problem. Otherwise the only possible response 
to saving the human race would be the one you've probably seen in some sci-fi 
horror movies, where the army is called out (wearing space suits) to shoot all 
diseased people from a safe distance, or just nuke affected areas. I'd prefer 
to see an increase in the level of care givers well in excess of doubling every 
month, as well as public health measures to reduce transmission. Beyond the 
current measures I would have to say, since these have been inadequate except 
in situations where there were only a handful of cases.

I'm sorry to have written an entire post where I didn't address the class 
struggle. It's just that if the ebola epidemic isn't turned around (or at least 
slowed) in the next two years, then there won't be a class struggle :-(

- Jeff





_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lis