headers
gabriel ross | 1 Nov 2004 01:31
Picon
Favicon

Re: Camejo and Shawki/ISO and so it goes...

If Chomsky, West, Zinn,Ehrenreich et al do not consider themselves leaders;why do they continue to give
advice to rest of Left on how to vote and on who has the right to stand for office ? Maybe their academic
positions, speaker fees, and book royalties have something to do with their view of the Bush threat.  Red Gabe

Brian Shannon <Brian_Shannon <at> verizon.net> wrote:In a message dated 10/30/2004 7:52:52 PM Pacific
Standard Time, 
mjunaidalam <at> msalam.net writes: I agree with this completely. Too much 
breezy and facile one-sided dismissal is going on here.

To which Octob1917 <at> aol.com replies:
I'm baffled by this statement, to be honest. If you could enumerate for 
me anything of substance the US Left is doing, or has done recently, to 
offer any meaningful resistance to the ongoing assaults by the ruling 
class at home and/or abroad I would be grateful. My dismissal is based 
on empirical fact, along with my experience of revolutionary/socialist 
organisations and the outstanding work they are doing in Scotland and 
in the occupied Six Counties of Ireland.

There is absolutely no militancy here, nobody risks anything, and that 
in the end is what it takes. I say it again, the organised Left in the 
US has succeeded only in repelling workers, due in large part to an 
intellectual snobbery responsible for substituting paternalism for 
solidarity. This talk about inserting revolutionaries into factories, 
etc., is just puerile, romantic nonsense; as if that could even be 
considered given the reality of the present state of the US Left and 
its lack of coherence and, again, militancy. Every leader I've come 
across is not a worker, rather a professional intellectual, occupying a 
sinecure on some university campus or other.

The only hope is a new formation arising out of the nascent MWM
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Yoshie Furuhashi | 1 Nov 2004 01:27
Picon
Favicon

Re: Fw: [Lavender-caucus] The Truth is Always Concrete:Election Evereflections from David McReynolds,NY Green for US Senate

I preface this post by a recommendation: vote for David McReynolds in New York.

That said, I should like to clarify where Peter Camejo stands:

>"The Truth is Always Concrete" - election thoughts, David McReynolds
<snip>
>First, "there is no difference between the two major parties" (a 
>position Peter Camejo has argued with vigor, and which is shared by 
>many in the Socialist Party). This position is nonsense. There are 
>major differences between the two major parties and, more important, 
>vast differences within them.

Actually, Peter Camejo has made a point of analyzing the precise 
differences between the Democratic and Republican Parties:

<blockquote>The Republican Party has historically acted as the open 
advocate for a platform which benefits the rule of wealth and 
corporate domination. They argue ideologically for policies 
benefiting the corporate rulers. The Republicans seek to convince the 
middle classes and labor to support the rule of the wealthy with the 
argument that "What's good for General Motors is good for the 
country," that what benefits corporations is also going to benefit 
regular people.

The Democratic Party is different. They act as a "broker" negotiating 
and selling influence among broad layers of the people to support the 
objectives of corporate rule. The Democratic Party's core group of 
elected officials is rooted in careerists seeking self-promotion by 
offering to the corporate rulers their ability to control and deliver 
mass support. And to the people they offer some concessions,
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Fred Feldman | 1 Nov 2004 01:45

Last pre-election response to John O'Brien


Just for the record, I  considered John O'Brien's accusation of "sexism"
and "homophobia," because I would not agree with his views on
fundamentalist Christians and used the sinful words "calm down," to be
unadulterated baiting.  I had used these words originally to those  in
reference to those (without regard to sex or sexual orientation) tend to
portray Fundamentalist Christians as enemies because of the views they
hold and, even more these days, because of which bourgeois candidate
they are widely suspected of planning to vote for in the election.

Rather than make a big protest --which I think would be a waste of print
on this list where I think this question is fairly well understood -- I
made light of them. And since I found myself offering a  similar
response about what I sometimes see as over-amping against people who
support Kerry, I repeated my joke at the expense of O'Brien's absurd
characterization of my use of the sinful words.  No regrets.

I think the tendency to exaggerate the moral or political importance of
how people vote in this classically exclusive US two-party election is
an electoralist illusion, and I am concerned at the effect on it can
have in various ways .  

Like everyone else, John has every right to make whatever judgments of
others he wants, and those judgments will have whatever weight anyone
else thinks is appropriate.

I attach his comments so that others can read them without the
wraparound effect that seems to be very common on the list.  My computer
has other problems, but I don't even know how to make this mistake.  I
strongly suggest that noone inform me how to do this.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
andypollack@juno.com | 1 Nov 2004 01:50
Picon
Favicon

massacre by Texas Rangers


Lyndon Johnson, George Bush -- efficient killers, but the Texas Rangers were there first:
"A recent book by an assistant history professor at Southern Methodist and other accounts exploiting
archives on both sides of the border, including a damning but little-known Texas legislative
investigation of 1919, link the Rangers to the "evaporations" of up to 5,000 Mexican insurgents and
Tejanos - Texans of Mexican origin - whose lands in the Rio Grande Valley were coveted by Anglo settlers."

full text at:
http://nytimes.com/2004/10/31/national/31rangers.html

________________________________________________________________
Speed up your surfing with Juno SpeedBand.
Now includes pop-up blocker!
Only $14.95/ month - visit http://www.juno.com/surf to sign up today!

_______________________________________________
Marxism mailing list
Marxism <at> lists.econ.utah.edu
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Philip Ferguson | 1 Nov 2004 02:18
Picon
Picon
Favicon

US ruling class and elections

Could anyone give me an idea about what kind of ruling class elements
are backing Bush (obviously oil, but which other sections) and what
elements of the ruling class are more pro-Kerry?

Phil

_______________________________________________
Marxism mailing list
Marxism <at> lists.econ.utah.edu
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism
Permalink | Reply | 3 comments |
headers
Fred Feldman | 1 Nov 2004 02:27

(no subject)


The "Million Worker March" and the Need for a Class Struggle Left Wing
in the Unions
by Tom Barrett

Though no one ever expected a turnout of a million people at the
"Million Worker March" in Washington on October 17, 2004, the actual
attendance was well below nearly everyone's expectations. No more than
10,000 attended, by the most generous estimates, and a high percentage
of them were committed activists. One participant commented to me, "You
know it's a small demonstration when everyone here knows each other."
The weeks and months to come will show whether the forces which
organized the event will continue to plan additional action to advance a
radical labor agenda or will become demoralized and cease to struggle
against the class-collaborationist leadership of the AFL-CIO, headed by
John Sweeney-a body of conservative union officials who continue in the
tradition of Samuel Gompers and George Meany. It is to be hoped,
however, that the labor militants who put so much energy and hard work
into making the demonstration a reality will recognize that they are
engaged in a long-term battle for the heart and soul of the U.S. working
class, a battle which can be won, though not easily. And a broader class
struggle left wing will be needed, going beyond the network of African
American trade union officials and a small group of allies among
radicals in the unions that organized and led the "Million Worker
March."
The Million Worker March's attendance was lower than expected.

The current leadership of the U.S. trade unions, based in an
administrative bureaucracy rather than in the workplaces where actual
production is done, has shown that it is capable of great foresight and
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Mark Lause | 1 Nov 2004 02:52
Picon

Know how not to waste your vote...please pass this on

Just a reminder, states have different rules about write-ins.  Even
local areas can use different procedures.

.So, if you're in a state where the Democrats were able to exclude
Nader, don't forget to consult..http://www.writeinnader.org/howto.php 

Solidarity!
Mark L.
_______________________________________________
Marxism mailing list
Marxism <at> lists.econ.utah.edu
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Lou Paulsen | 1 Nov 2004 03:00
Picon
Favicon

RE: US ruling class and elections


-----Original Message-----
From: marxism-bounces <at> lists.econ.utah.edu
[mailto:marxism-bounces <at> lists.econ.utah.edu] On Behalf Of Philip Ferguson

Could anyone give me an idea about what kind of ruling class elements
are backing Bush (obviously oil, but which other sections) and what
elements of the ruling class are more pro-Kerry?

Phil

Phil, this is an awfully good question, and I would like to see any data on
this point.

Frankly, I am not sure that the election breaks down very neatly like that
in terms of "sections" and I am not sure that your "obvious" suggestion that
"oil" supports Bush even holds water.  (For one thing, you would have to
start off by segmenting oil into the major multinationals vs. smaller
domestic producers and so on.)

We have to bear in mind that, despite the intense polarization of the
election within the working and middle classes, Bush and Kerry really have
very much the same policy, and you would have to look awfully hard to find
an industry that would do well under one and badly under the other.  In
general I suspect that the old generalization - that the Democrats represent
the biggest and most secure and most multinational monopolies, the big
banks, Microsoft, etc., while the Republicans represent the more numerous
smaller, less multinational businesses - may hold some water.  For example,
the ruling-class fortunes that are tied up in corporate funds or trusts
might have benefited less from Bush's individual tax cuts, and might be
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Joaquín | 1 Nov 2004 03:14

RE: Camejo and Shawki/ISO and so it goes...

Paul Bunyan writes, "If the State Capitalist tradition is an impediment for
growth for the ISO, why is the ISO, outside of the Social-Dem tendencies one
of the largest groups on the US left (the CP may be larger, I don't know)?"

I don't think it can be reasonably argued that *any* position on these sorts
of questions is an impediment or contributor to growth of a left group in
the U.S. in an immediate way. 

I don't believe the big majority of ISO members have delved deeply into the
historical and theoretical issues involved. It is simply accepted. And this
isn't an issue like tactics in fighting imperialist war or even the national
question in the United States, where the direct individual and collective
experience of a group of comrades provides a material grounding for
discussion. Arguably, those of us who were active in politics for at least a
few years before 1989 have at least some personal feel for what the
existence of the USSR meant in world politics.

But political groups TODAY do (or at least should) have members of their
political committees to whom the struggle against apartheid in southern
Africa and Cuba's role in that is something they have learned about, if at
all, in historical readings.

I happen to be in a group where a whole bunch of people have theoretical
positions akin to those of the ISO. The practical political effect seems to
be vanishingly small. Some of these comrades took a hyper-critical position
on the "crackdown" in Cuba a year and a half ago that others of us disagreed
with. The ISO, if I remember right, took a political position more aligned
with my own than with those in my group who are closer to them on the
historical and theoretical issues.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
acpollack2@juno.com | 1 Nov 2004 02:56
Picon
Favicon

MWM at Counterpunch


Some worthwhile points; lead story now at counterpunch.org:
The Long March
...and the Million Worker March

By JOANN WYPIJEWSKI

_______________________________________________
Marxism mailing list
Marxism <at> lists.econ.utah.edu
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |

Gmane