Title: Re: [PEN-L:20135] Mau-mauing The Oppressor and other crazy shit
Greetings Economists,
Tom Walker writes a lot of things,
Walker,
What I would be interested to know, however, is whether Saylor objects to ...B. the metaphorical use of clinical diagnostic terms as a first approximation
I probably am dense. I used to let the river flow and it resembled the
Cuyahoga (sp) river near Cleveland, which burst into flames.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Michael, don't get me wrong, but why are you so dense? You sound like an
> authoritarian father. don't discuss this! don't discuss that!
Michael, don't get me wrong, but why are you so dense? You sound like an
authoritarian father. don't discuss this! don't discuss that! shut up! why
don't you let the river flow instead? I think people should be
reminded if they misrepresent certain realities, and this is, naturally,
the part of c
You see, Brad, once this sort of debate begins it will do nothing than create
this sort of discussion.
Louis Proyect wrote:
> Brad:
> >So let me ask you: what do you call a society where upwards of 50
> >million people die because no one in authority (save Peng Dehuai)
> >dares tell the Great He
>> >>"Collective pathology" is a politically suspect term to accept.
>>>Not only it has been strategically used to label and criminalize certain
>>>races (so called _backward, irrational, non- white peoples_), but also
>>>been instrumental in safeguarding the ideology of racism for the benefit
>>
>Are you using real numbers or the ones that Rudy Rummel likes to make up?
>How come you don't feature his bogus numbers any more on your webpage? I'd
>like to think that you were embarrassed out of using them.
>
>Louis Proyect
>Marxism mailing list: http://www.marxmail.org/
According to Roderick
Mine wrote,
> I did not say that you have implied a genetic etiology! That is
> the heart of the argument! No racist would apperently say so, if you
> read the mainstream studies on race closely.
Ah! So I'm a racist because I _didn't_ say so. H.
> What one has to do is to look at the scient
Brad:
>So let me ask you: what do you call a society where upwards of 50
>million people die because no one in authority (save Peng Dehuai)
>dares tell the Great Helmsman that local party committees are grossly
>overstating the size of the harvest?
Are you using real numbers or the ones that R
Walker wrote:
>Ideology? Racism? Jingoism? Your own terminology tacitly accepts some
>kind >of collective determination of consciousness. The next step is to
>acknowledge that, e.g., racism is dysfunctional for the racist as well as
>for the victim. Nothing that I've said implies a genetic etiol
Mine Doyran wrote,
> Not _every_ theory of collective pathology is necessarily fascist. I
> meant that, however, the _intellectual tradition_ you mention (Adorno's
> totalitarian personality, LeBon's group psychology, Freud's discussion
> on war, etc..) carry a dangerous potential to rationalize
CB: Might the concept of demogogue help in dealing with these cases of
"evil geniuses" , in the sense that demogogues use powerful partial truths
combined with egregious lies ? Somehow uniting these opposites.
TW: Absolutely. The fact that they are powerful partial truths means
that we can't just
>>"Collective pathology" is a politically suspect term to accept.
>>Not only it has been strategically used to label and criminalize certain
>>races (so called _backward, irrational, non- white peoples_), but also
>>been instrumental in safeguarding the ideology of racism for the benefit
>>of Ame
Brad, I hope this does not provoke another fruitless round of debate
regarding your interpretation of various socialist societies. I am sure
that you did not intend to launch such a thread.
Brad wrote,
> What, then, are we to call Nazi Germany? Or China during the Great
> Leap Forward?
> --
>
>"Collective pathology" is a politically suspect term to accept.
>Not ony it has been strategically used to label and criminalize certain
>races (so called _backward, irrational, non- white peoples_), but also
>been instrumental in safeguarding the ideology of racism for the benefit
>of American j
Mine Doyran wrote,
> "Collective pathology" is a politically suspect term to accept.
Suspicion is well advised. Gustave Lebon's work is pretty scary, for
example. On the other hand, Ernst Bloch, Walter Benjamin, Theodor Adorno
and Herbert Marcuse all used some kind of analysis of mass psychology
>Tom Walker wrote:
>things. Redeploying the clinical diagnostic terms from their use as
>labels >for individuals to a broader critique of collective pathology is
about as >far from "anti-disabled thinking" as I can imagine.
"Collective pathology" is a politically suspect term to accept.
Not
Doyle Saylor wrote,
> anti-disabled thinking in Tom Walkers recent posting
. . .
> I question his focus on a disability. I think he has a lot to prove.
What are the charges against me? Presumably that my suggestion that there
may be such a thing as collective pathology was tantamount to hate
17 matches
Mail list logo
