[Marxism] Muslim notables?
lnp3 at panix.com
Wed Nov 7 08:09:45 MST 2007
Lenin's Tomb wrote:
> I do get it: you think 'reformist' is a term of abuse because you associate
> its use with the nutters on the sectarian fringe of the American left.
> That's not my problem, frankly. We use it as a neutral (dare I say
> 'scientific'?) description. You would be hard pressed to
What if I began calling you a reformist on Marxmail? Would you be so bland?
> You are yourself confusing two separate issues. There are struggles that
> are necessary, and which any revolutionary should be at the forefront of
> fighting - and reformists can and should also be at the forefront. But it
> doesn't mean that reformists cease to be such in the context of this
> The second point is that you don't seem to be aware that Hallas was
> supporting Lenin's position against the "simon-pure" impossibilism of the
I understand what he was trying to say. I would give him a B- or a C+
> Now, there's something curious going on here. There is a crisis in Respect,
> in which Galloway has resorted to his Old Labour means to attack the SWP and
> enforce a very rigid electoralist format on the coalition - unsuccessful in
> that, he and a small coterie of 'names' around him have split. Your
> response is to attack the SWP's conception of a 'united front of a special
> kind', ignore all specifics of the struggle, and then engage in a series of
> staccato switches - one minute it's about Bob Avakian and how awful some
> revolutionaries, next it's about what Duncan Hallas said in 1973, next it'll
> be something else irrelevant to the issues.
It may be irrelevant to you, but I am not really trying to convince you
of anything. I am talking over your head to the thousands of people who
read the Marxmail archives and my blog and who are appalled by sectarian
idiocy on the left.
> We agree with that strategy and have pursued it with some measure of
> success. You are unlikely to find a campaign for reforms or the defense of
> useful reforms (such as the NHS, council housing, public utilities etc) that
> we are not involved in.
Of course, you are the rrrrrrevolutionary wing of the movement.
> There was no such threat, veiled or otherwise. You fabulated that in order
> to pitch for the moral high ground and excuse yourself for removing to a
> venue where you feel more fully in control and don't have to listen to those
> awful critics.
Fabulated? I did not. I actually was presequintilesticating in the
fashion I learned from Dr. Irwin Corey, my political science professor
back in the 1960s.
More information about the Marxism