Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] Ghandi rejected Zionism

[yves coleman]

The above letter from Gandhi does not show he was antisemitic (although he
did not understand at all what to be "a chosen race" meant for the religious
jews - a terrible burden and a sacrifice not a silly-boasting glory as most
antisemites and some... Jews believe), but it shows that the non violent
resistance of the Jews Gandhi advocated in front of the Nazis was a criminal
political attitude.
Yves Colema



>  Palestine belongs to the Arabs in the same sense that England belongs to the
> English or France to the French. It is  wrong and in-human to impose the Jews
> on the Arabs...  Surely it would be a crime against humanity to reduce the
> proud Arabs so that Palestine can be restored to the Jews partly or wholly as
> their national home.

Several letters have been received by me asking me to declare  my views
about  the  Arab-Jew  question  in   Palestine and the persecution of the
Jews in Germany. It is not without hesitation that I venture to offer my
views on this very difficult question.

My sympathies are all with the Jews. I have known them intimately in South
Africa.  Some  of  them  became  life-long  companions.  Through these
friends I came to  learn  much  of their  age-long persecution. They have
been the untouchables of Christianity. The parallel between their treatment
by Christians and the  treatment of untouchables by Hindus is very close.
Religious  sanction  has been invoked in both cases for the justification of
the  inhuman treatment  meted  out  to them.  Apart  from  the
friendships, therefore, there is the  more common  universal  reason  for
my sympathy for the Jews.

But my sympathy does not blind me to the requirements of justice.  The cry
for the national home for the Jews  does  not  make  much appeal to me. The
sanction for it is sought in the Bible and  the tenacity with which  the
Jews  have  hankered  after  return  to Palestine. Why should they not, like
other peoples of the  earth, make that country their home where they are
born and  where  they earn their livelihood?

Palestine belongs to the Arabs in the  same  sense  that  England belongs to
the English or France to the French. It is  wrong  and in-human to impose
the Jews on the Arabs. What  is going  on  in Palestine today cannot be
justified by any moral code of conduct.  The mandates have no sanction but
that of the last war. Surely it would be a crime against humanity to reduce
the  proud  Arabs  so that Palestine can be restored to the Jews partly  or
wholly  as their national home.

The nobler course would be to insist on a just treatment  of  the Jews
wherever they are born and bred. The Jews born in France are French in
precisely the same sense that Christians born in France are French. If the
Jews have no home  but  Palestine,  will  they relish the idea of being
forced to leave the other parts  of  the world in which they are settled?
Or do they want a double home where they can remain at will? This cry  for
the  national  home affords a colourable justification for the  German
expulsion  of the Jews.

But the German persecution of the Jews seems to have no  parallel in
history.  The tyrants of old never went so mad as Hitler  seems to have
gone.  And he is doing it with religious zeal.  For  he  is propounding a
new religion of exclusive and militant  nationalism in the name of which any
inhumanity becomes an act of humanity to be rewarded here and hereafter.
The crime of an obviously mad but intrepid  youth  is  being visited  upon
his  whole  race  with unbelievable ferocity.  If there ever could be a
justifiable  war in the name of and  for humanity,  a  war against  Germany,
to prevent  the  wanton persecution  of  a  whole  race,  would  be
completely justified.  But I  do  not  believe  in  any  war.  A discussion
of the pros and  cons of  such  a  war  is  therefore outside my horizon or
province. 

But if there can be no war against Germany, even for such a crime as is
being committed against the Jews, surely there  can  be  no alliance with
Germany.  How can there be alliance between a nation which claims to stand
for justice and democracy and one which is the declared enemy of both?  Or
is England drifting towards  armed dictatorship and all it means?

Germany is showing to the world how efficiently violence  can  be worked
when it is not  hampered  by  any  hypocrisy  or  weakness masquerading as
humanitarianism.  It is also showing how  hideous, terrible and terrifying
it looks in its nakedness. Can  the  Jews resist this organised and
shameless persecution?  Is there  a  way to  preserve their  self-respect,
and  not  to  feel  helpless, neglected and forlorn?  I submit there is. No
person who has faith in a living God need feel helpless or  forlorn.
Jehovah  of  the Jews is a God more personal than the God of the
Christians,  the Mussalmans or the Hindus, though, as a matter of fact in
essence, He is  common  to  all  and one  without  a second  and  beyond
description.  But as the Jews a

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] Barack Obama Worked For The CIA - John Pilger

[yves coleman]

Thanks for your detailed answers.


Le 5/01/10 9:37, « CeJ »  a écrit :

> 
> Perhaps the more interesting issue here is the one of conflict within
> the 'ruling class'.
> 
> Bush seemed to have near-universal support over his post-9/11
> policies. And a war is often a good way to bring together the
> imaginary--even hysterical--interests of the ruling class with the
> religio-nationalist interests of the ruled, so as to keep the class
> conflicts in check (the real interests of the ruling class being
> perpetuation of rule, enrichment for their factions). I say that more
> or less amounts to the post-modern version of fascism, others argue
> against the use of such terminology. I think the deniers ought to have
> to spend one week in Iraq or Afghanistan and be forced to tell the
> Americans how the shit the US serves up tastes so good and how much
> they love them for it. Then they might change their minds about the
> semantics. (I agree on the other hand that the old definition of the
> term regarding mass parties who could and did take political power in
> nations is largely obsolete.)
> 
>  The ruling class debate under Clinton was whether to proceed with
> impeaching him over a blowjob--or not. The majority were for
> politically damaging him to the point where he did almost nothing in
> office except bomb Iraq and Yugoslavia, but note how abruptly the
> impeachment movement collapsed when they realized what they were about
> to do (and remember Joe Leiberman was the Judas then too who helped
> take it that far). Even Clinton's bombing of Yugoslavia, if you review
> the votes in Congress, reveals the ruling class was split against him,
> which is unusual because wars in the US are at least at the beginning
> quite popular, especially ones where the US gets to show overwhelming
> might and not suffer many casualties (although the much-vaunted US
> military never did show any effectiveness whatsover against Serb
> forces in Kosovo--which is why they chose the 'bomb Yugoslavia'
> option).
> 
> The ruling class debate under Bush was far less contentious. One, it
> was over how best to cover up the fact that the national security
> state in charge of 'national security' (while enriching itself) had
> fucked up so badly that it had only managed to enrich itself. The
> solution? Start wars and conflicts on multiple fronts and scare the
> shit ouf the civilian populations of 'western democracies'. While
> enriching themselves.
> 
> The next ruling class debate under Bush was over the war on
> Iraq--which if you remember had been going on for over a decade.
> Clinton had even bought himself some relief by signing on to
> full-blown 'regime change' and increasing military spending in his
> last two years in office. The debate wasn't about whether to wage the
> war but rather how to do it. Often the discussion was about how to bring
> NATO and UN satellites along for the war. The inner debate though was
> about just how much of the US's extremely expensive military to commit
> to the invasion and first two years of occupation.
> 
> Under Obama the ruling class showed itself -- I'm guessing -- AGAINST
> major health care reform--that is, a public option. So although the
> ruling class overall supports Obama and his policies so far in terms
> of dropping bombs and assigning troops, they didn't support his stance
> on health care. But he only made that stance in 2008, before he took
> office. I didn't note any impassioned speeches from the guy when the
> actual debate in Congress was taking place. He simply diddled himself
> and played with Gen. McChrystal. Like most presidents the man has
> the power--and apparently the will--to start new wars, even destroy the world,
> but he can't take a disciplined stand on health care. I think behind
> all that nice dental work and ghost-authored speeches,
>  like a lot of people who studied under Zbigniew,
> Obama really doesn't give a shit either. He makes Bill Clinton look
> like a vertebrate.





___
Marxism-Thaxis mailing list
Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] Barack Obama Worked For The CIA - John Pilger

[yves coleman]

Living in France, I have some problems with this debate. What does it change
for you, once Clinton and Obama are head of the American State and so in a
position to give orders to  the CIA, to "prove" that they had previous
contacts with the CIA under a direct or undirect form ? What does it prove ?
That the CIA or the Secret services manipulate all word politics ? A kind of
Left wing version of Tom Clancy's novels ?
Tom Clancy always tries to justify in his books (I'm obliged to read them
for my proofreading job in France, so this is why I take this example, and
also because it symbolises for me a form of  international popular "culture"
as it is translated in so many languages and adapted in films) that Secret
Services are essential for the defence of "world's democracy". Most of the
time his political examples are just hilarious, for anyone who tries to
understand the complexity of world politics. But it has one advantage: his
vision of the world is quite simple to understand. The USA and Israel
through their very efficient secret services save the world and fight the
Evil : communism, islamism, terrorism, the KGB/GPU/NKVD/MVD which will never
die, Russia, China and Iran, etc.
He even pushes his fascination for Secret Services to the extreme: his
Presidential hero is a former leader of a  kind of private Secret Service.

So all the importance of all this discussion and pseudo information and
pseudo "proofs" of Pilger and Co. about Obama and Clinton's links with the
CIA look very strange to me.

Apart from a left conspirationist point of view (which does not seem to be
this list's point of view but which could coincide with Clancy's simplistic
view of world politics, with the only difference that everything Clancy
praises, left conspirationists despise it) what is the political interest
for you of these kind of uncheckable information ?

Is there in the United States a significant portion of the population which
is naive enough to believe that Clinton and Obama were elected AGAINST the
will of the majority of the ruling class, of the ruling circles of the
State, of the Secret Services, of the Armed forces, etc. ?

So why all this fuss about the CIA ?


Le 4/01/10 21:03, « c b »  a écrit :

> 
> CeJ jannuzi
> 
> Actually the youtube title is sensationalistic because in this little
> clip you will see Pilger do more analysis of Bushwa and Obama than you
> will see watching a year of Wolf Blitzer on CNN--starting with
> 'class', which is a term Marxists are familiar with.
> 
> I would be wary of the 'WMR' material that is out there in blogdom,
> but Pilger is as always credible and to the point.
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lciMExazVqw
> 
> 
> 
> CB: I think he might be a double agent, 'cause he was also the Mau Mau
> Candidate ( like the Manchurian Candidate)
> 
> ___
> Marxism-Thaxis mailing list
> Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu
> To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
> http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis
> 





___
Marxism-Thaxis mailing list
Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] Baraka on Barack ( old post and topic)

[yves coleman]

I dont know why this old post comes up now, a year later after it was posted
!

To answer your questions. I dont know what I would do if I was an isolated
individual who "wanted to do something" in an unfavorable situation both for
me and for the working class historically. The decision would depend on many
specific factors I cant list here and which would be more related to fiction
than to reality.
If I was in a position to form a group or to join a group defending class
positions I would not loose my time in Stalinist (German CP) or
nationalist-antisemtic (Hamas) or third wordist groups (Chavez party).

As regards the Hamas, I would not even try because they would probably kill
me given my opposition both to religion, clerical fascism and antisemitism.

And if I was living in Venezuela today (which I did many years ago) I would
knock on the door of El Libertario and see if their acts correspond to their
nice words... And then decide.


Le 17/11/09 14:43, « c b »  a écrit :

> 
> At 10:54 AM 9/9/2008, yves coleman wrote:
>> I think people can vote for whoever they want...but I  don't want to hear
>> their complains about the negative results of their votes afterwards !
>> 
>> Are "Realpolitik" and pushing Party X or Mr Y to do something they will
>> never do, are these tactics worth the trial ?
>> 
>> The problem as usual is the impotence, small size and small influence of the
>> Revolutionary Left everywhere.
>> 
>> Some people think there are shortcuts and they have THE solution. They are
>> wiser and they will fool the capitalist class. Well let's see the historical
>> results of their shortcuts.
>> 
>> These shortcuts have been practiced for more than a century with no results
>> whatsover anywhere.
>> The idea that if we dont chose the lesser evil the worse evil may win is not
>> new on the political field. It's the argument the Stalinists and Social
>> democrats use at every election in France. It's an eternal problem for any
>> revolutionary party or group who is not big enough on the electoral ground
>> to make any difference.
>> 
>> With this kind of reasoning, I should have voted Mitterrand against Giscard
>> in 1981, and for the SP candidate in the following elections, and Chirac
>> against Le Pen.
>> Or to take a more dramatic example I shoud have voted for the German
>> Communist Party against Hitler as Baraka likes to use antifascist metaphors.
> 
> ^^^
> CB: Ok this is an old post and an old topic from 1932, but you are
> saying one shouldn't have voted for the German CP against Hitler
> !!!
> 
> ^
> 
> 
>> Or I should have entered the French CP dominated resistance and help them
>> have a strike-breaking policy after defeating "fascism" with the major help
>> of American imperialism.
>> And if I was in Venezuela I would today support Chavez against its most
>> reactionary opponents. In Cuba I would support Castro, etc. And in
>> "imperialist Israel" I would support the Hamas.
> 
> 
> CB:  Who _do_ you support ?
> 
> ^^^
> 
> ___
> Marxism-Thaxis mailing list
> Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu
> To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
> http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis
> 





___
Marxism-Thaxis mailing list
Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] Marxism & the Jewish Question: Selected Bibliography

[yves coleman]

Dear Ralph, you can write to Savas ( e...@ath.forthnet.gr ) and arlene
clemesha ( aec...@hotmail.com ) to know if the first has an English version
of his article and the second an English version of her book, or an article
in English related to your research.
I have never met them but they know me because I have translated articles
from them for the journal Ni patrie ni frontières. So you can quote my
name...
The Jewish Question has been recently republished with articles and prefaces
notably for the Trotskyist philosopher and 4th international leader Daniel
Bensaid but they are in French, as far as I know.
Enzo Traverso has extensively written on the Jewish question and I see that
some of his books are translated in English but I cant remember if he has
explicitly written about the Jewish Question of Marx. I'll check
Will look if I find any interesting things in French about your subject.
Yours
Yves

Le 17/11/09 11:53, « Ralph Dumain »  a
écrit :

> 
> Thanks. I got some main ideas out of a cursory
> scan of this article, but I'm confused at other
> points. Also, I didn't follow the historical
> exposition too closely. If I could read this is a
> bone fide English translation I'd do better. I'll
> just note the points that leapt out at me.
> 
> 1. The author counterposes pseudo-materialist
> interpretations to idealist-culturalist
> conceptions, suggesting that both must be
> transcended. On the face of it I agree. I am
> uncertain about what his final view is, though.
> 
> 2. He singles out Abram Leon as having the most
> sophisticated historical explanation, dissenting
> however from the notion of a people-class.
> 
> 3. The quotation from Rosa Luxemburg reveals an
> underdeveloped aspect of Marxism, not only on the
> Jewish question, but on national questions
> generally. Without unpacking Luxemburg's meaning, it seems incredibly obtuse.
> 
> 4. The author correctly points out that Marx's
> article on the Jewish Question is not entirely
> Marxist but marks a turning point in the break from Hegelianism.
> 
> Furthermore, he claims: "Après Marx, les
> marxistes, à quelques exceptions près (dont
> Trotsky durant les années 30), n'ont pas analysé
> de façon exhaustive et profonde cette base
> séculière réelle."  [After Marx, the Marxists,
> with few exceptions (including Trotsky during the
> 30s) have not exhaustively analyzed this deep and genuine secular basis.]
> 
> And of course he goes on to elaborate on this
> secular basis. But I want to point out something
> about Marx's essay. It is purely schematic in its
> contrast and positing of the relationship between
> the Sabbath and secular Jew, because in
> actuality, aside from not taking the trouble to
> describe the secular Jew in other than
> generalized stereotypical terms, Marx simply
> states that the Sabbath Jew is an illusory
> self-image of the Jew, contrasted with the real
> Jew, but without actually relating the material
> basis of Jewish existence to the form of
> consciousness known as Judaism, so as such fails
> to account at all for this religious illusion in
> the past or in the present, and most importantly
> its persistence from one epoch to a radically different ones.
> 
> 5. The author does at some point relate the Old
> Testament as a form of consciousness to the
> material existence of the Jews in antiquity, and
> later, I think, but I do not understand this exposition.
> 
> 
> At 04:08 PM 11/16/2009, yves coleman wrote:
>> http://www.mondialisme.org/spip.php?article1315
>> 
>> Here you will find many texts about the socalled Jewish question but in
>> French, translated from English, Spanish, Portuguese and Italian.
>> Specifically about your subject maybe you will find of interest the text of
>> Savas Michael-Matsas a Greek marxist (trotskyist) which has an original
>> point of view, even if I strongly disagree with his  political views on
>> Israel today.
>> 
>> You also have a book of Arlene Clemesha (a Brazilian Marxist) but in
>> portuguese
> 
> 
> ___
> Marxism-Thaxis mailing list
> Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu
> To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
> http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis
> 





___
Marxism-Thaxis mailing list
Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] Marxism & the Jewish Question: Selected Bibliography

[yves coleman]

http://www.po.org.ar/edm/edm22/sobre.htm

Here is the article of Michael-Matsas in Spanish. I cant find it in English.


Le 16/11/09 18:37, « Ralph Dumain »  a
écrit :

> 
> I've added some further references to my bibliography in progress,
> and I'm too worn out to go looking for more material, but here's a good start:
> 
> Marxism & the Jewish Question: Selected Bibliography
> compiled by Ralph Dumain
> http://www.autodidactproject.org/bib/jews-marxism.html
> 
> There are some idiosyncratic inclusions, but there are a variety of
> angles presented here so as to get a good view of the issues and the
> various applications of these concepts.
> 
> As I've mentioned, with but a few exceptions I've deflected attention
> from Marx's "On the Jewish Question", which is a whole topic by
> itself regarding in-depth investigation.
> 
> I could not find any noteworthy work by Engels on this subject. Most
> of his remarks consist of reportage of specific events and situations
> or very specific comments. Of more general interest, the only thing I
> could find was a commentary about the politics of the anti-Semitic peasantry.
> 
> I have never been able to find a bibliographic reference for the
> oft-quoted but never-sourced remark by August Bebel: "Anti-semitism
> is the socialism of fools."  It doesn't matter all that much, but
> maybe someday . . . My bibliography aims at an analytical,
> theoretical perspective, and is not so much concerned about the
> specifics of the problem except insofar as the issue is tied into
> larger struggles over the national question, as per the Bolsheviks
> vs. the Jewish Labor Bund, which features prominently.
> 
> Similarly, Zionism plays an ancillary role here, though it is an
> integral historical component.
> 
> My explanatory note at the end states my principles of composition.
> 
> My initial motivation for doing this comes from research into the
> late 19th-century Eastern European Jewish intelligentsia, without
> concern for contemporary controversies. However, sad to say, I find
> this excursion into the past all too relevant to the political
> degeneracy of the present historical moment. The Internet is a
> magnificent tool for disseminating poison, and detecting its presence
> globally. I find that when I have absolutely no intention of getting
> involved in debates over the Middle East, and even when I'm
> researching topics having no direct connection with either the past
> or the present politics of the region or anywhere, I'm bumping
> constantly into the most vile bigotry as well as the more subtle
> kind. Such are the fruits not only of the resurgence of the right and
> neo-nazism, but of the poison tree of Stalinism, ultraleftism,
> leftist thirdworldism, and third world nationalism, finally dumbed
> down to the retarded trinity of vulgar anti-imperialism,
> anti-Americanism, and anti-Zionism, which has been labeled the
> "anti-globalism of fools." (Excuse all the mixed metaphors, but I'm
> in a hurry.)
> 
> In this regard, see:
> 
> Postone, Moishe. 
> " >History 
> and Helplessness: Mass Mobilization and Contemporary Forms of
> Anticapitalism," Engage, Issue 5, September 2007.
> 
> I am unfamiliar with the political situation in the UK, but I find
> the group Engage of interest:
> 
> http://engageonline.wordpress.com/
> 
> I actually am more interested in pursuing my original research
> project, but given the number of assholes I encounter each day, I
> find myself deflected from my original mission.
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> 
> "Scholars of Wisdom have no rest in this world or in the world to
> come."  -- Talmud
> ___
> Marxism-Thaxis mailing list
> Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu
> To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
> http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis
> 





___
Marxism-Thaxis mailing list
Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] Marxism & the Jewish Question: Selected Bibliography

[yves coleman]

http://www.mondialisme.org/spip.php?article1315

Here you will find many texts about the socalled Jewish question but in
French, translated from English, Spanish, Portuguese and Italian.
Specifically about your subject maybe you will find of interest the text of
Savas Michael-Matsas a Greek marxist (trotskyist) which has an original
point of view, even if I strongly disagree with his  political views on
Israel today.

You also have a book of Arlene Clemesha (a Brazilian Marxist) but in
portuguese




Le 16/11/09 18:37, « Ralph Dumain »  a
écrit :

> 
> I've added some further references to my bibliography in progress,
> and I'm too worn out to go looking for more material, but here's a good start:
> 
> Marxism & the Jewish Question: Selected Bibliography
> compiled by Ralph Dumain
> http://www.autodidactproject.org/bib/jews-marxism.html
> 
> There are some idiosyncratic inclusions, but there are a variety of
> angles presented here so as to get a good view of the issues and the
> various applications of these concepts.
> 
> As I've mentioned, with but a few exceptions I've deflected attention
> from Marx's "On the Jewish Question", which is a whole topic by
> itself regarding in-depth investigation.
> 
> I could not find any noteworthy work by Engels on this subject. Most
> of his remarks consist of reportage of specific events and situations
> or very specific comments. Of more general interest, the only thing I
> could find was a commentary about the politics of the anti-Semitic peasantry.
> 
> I have never been able to find a bibliographic reference for the
> oft-quoted but never-sourced remark by August Bebel: "Anti-semitism
> is the socialism of fools."  It doesn't matter all that much, but
> maybe someday . . . My bibliography aims at an analytical,
> theoretical perspective, and is not so much concerned about the
> specifics of the problem except insofar as the issue is tied into
> larger struggles over the national question, as per the Bolsheviks
> vs. the Jewish Labor Bund, which features prominently.
> 
> Similarly, Zionism plays an ancillary role here, though it is an
> integral historical component.
> 
> My explanatory note at the end states my principles of composition.
> 
> My initial motivation for doing this comes from research into the
> late 19th-century Eastern European Jewish intelligentsia, without
> concern for contemporary controversies. However, sad to say, I find
> this excursion into the past all too relevant to the political
> degeneracy of the present historical moment. The Internet is a
> magnificent tool for disseminating poison, and detecting its presence
> globally. I find that when I have absolutely no intention of getting
> involved in debates over the Middle East, and even when I'm
> researching topics having no direct connection with either the past
> or the present politics of the region or anywhere, I'm bumping
> constantly into the most vile bigotry as well as the more subtle
> kind. Such are the fruits not only of the resurgence of the right and
> neo-nazism, but of the poison tree of Stalinism, ultraleftism,
> leftist thirdworldism, and third world nationalism, finally dumbed
> down to the retarded trinity of vulgar anti-imperialism,
> anti-Americanism, and anti-Zionism, which has been labeled the
> "anti-globalism of fools." (Excuse all the mixed metaphors, but I'm
> in a hurry.)
> 
> In this regard, see:
> 
> Postone, Moishe. 
> " >History 
> and Helplessness: Mass Mobilization and Contemporary Forms of
> Anticapitalism," Engage, Issue 5, September 2007.
> 
> I am unfamiliar with the political situation in the UK, but I find
> the group Engage of interest:
> 
> http://engageonline.wordpress.com/
> 
> I actually am more interested in pursuing my original research
> project, but given the number of assholes I encounter each day, I
> find myself deflected from my original mission.
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> 
> "Scholars of Wisdom have no rest in this world or in the world to
> come."  -- Talmud
> ___
> Marxism-Thaxis mailing list
> Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu
> To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
> http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis
> 





___
Marxism-Thaxis mailing list
Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] Baraka on Barack

[yves coleman]

I think people can vote for whoever they want...but I  don't want to hear
their complains about the negative results of their votes afterwards !

Are "Realpolitik" and pushing Party X or Mr Y to do something they will
never do, are these tactics worth the trial ?

The problem as usual is the impotence, small size and small influence of the
Revolutionary Left everywhere.

Some people think there are shortcuts and they have THE solution. They are
wiser and they will fool the capitalist class. Well let's see the historical
results of their shortcuts.

These shortcuts have been practiced for more than a century with no results
whatsover anywhere.
The idea that if we dont chose the lesser evil the worse evil may win is not
new on the political field. It's the argument the Stalinists and Social
democrats use at every election in France. It's an eternal problem for any
revolutionary party or group who is not big enough on the electoral ground
to make any difference.

With this kind of reasoning, I should have voted Mitterrand against Giscard
in 1981, and for the SP candidate in the following elections, and Chirac
against Le Pen.
Or to take a more dramatic example I shoud have voted for the German
Communist Party against Hitler as Baraka likes to use antifascist metaphors.
Or I should have entered the French CP dominated resistance and help them
have a strike-breaking policy after defeating "fascism" with the major help
of American imperialism.
And if I was in Venezuela I would today support Chavez against its most
reactionary opponents. In Cuba I would support Castro, etc. And in
"imperialist Israel" I would support the Hamas.

If an individual wants to make these choices, I can only tell him don't
complain about the results and stop presenting your indivual choice as the
most sophisticated revolutionary tactics. You dont think it's worth fighting
for revolutionary politics, that's fine. But dont accuse me to be an agent
of imperialism, fascism, racism, etc. if I choose another option.

If a political group who claims to have an original and specific view about
history, class struggle, imperialism, socialism, etc. supports actively this
kind of position,  I can only say this group should  enter the party it is
supporting: enter the Socialist party in France, the Venezuelan party in
Venezuela, the Hamas in Palestine, the Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Baas in
Irak, the CCP Party in Cuba, the Democratic Party in the USA, the Talibans
in Afghanistan, etc. Actually that's what many leftists have done in the
past and are doing or supporting.
Have they ever succeeded to "push"these parties or movements to the Left ?
Not until now.
Can one can dream they will succeed this time ?
I have strong doubts about it.

Real Politik has a heavy price both in international politics and in
domestic politics. The interesting question for me is rather : why is Baraka
so desperate to pay this price ? That's a more interesting question than
debating about if one should vote or not for Obama (1).
Generally when political people make these choices, they have a whole
reasoning in mind, hidden practical ambitions, or illusions the situation
may radically change, etc.
That's at least what I have always seen in discussions inside the Left from
the leftists who supported the NLF or the Cultural Revolution and predicted
it will bring socialism, to those who support Chavez, the Hamas, the
Hezbollah or even the Talibans today.
I don't know what Baraka's politics are but his position can be understood
for me, living in France, only if we discuss about his more general
framework and field of activity in the USA.
If you see him as a reference of thought maybe you could indicate me some
sources on the Net ? I have a collection of his writings but I read only
half of the book and stopped, seing no interest in continuing my reading.
Maybe I missed something very important so "as I dont wont to die stupied"
(a say in French) please help me to.


(1) All the bourgeois medias in France support Obama. So supporting Obama is
not really a political issue here. It's the Official Truth and Politics.




___
Marxism-Thaxis mailing list
Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] Marx on international relations

[yves coleman]

In French you have a useful book "Marx, Engels and international policy"
published in 1975 by Gallimard, which could be a good starting point if you
read French or if it has been translated into English. In French also you
have collections of texts of Marx about China, India, Balkans, etc. I
suppose you have the same kind of collected works around one topic in
English ? Did you check ?
Yours
Yves




___
Marxism-Thaxis mailing list
Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis

Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] Rosa Lichtenstein again

[yves coleman]

"Buy a vibrator" you wrote ? I suppose that is a new intelligent feminist
marxist argument ?







___
Marxism-Thaxis mailing list
Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis