oklahoma bombing -Reply

Kevin T. Mahoney ktmahone at mailbox.syr.edu
Sun Apr 23 18:14:02 MDT 1995


On Sun, 23 Apr 1995, THAMI MADINANE wrote:

> Der Comrades:
> Because of the lies and deceptions this story continue to generate,
> it particular in the climate of grief and anger.  Most of what can be
> said so far is still dangerous speculation which also tends to breed
> irrationality.  I would prefer we refrain, at least for a while, from
> this discussion.

while i do think that it is important to be cautious about falling into a
"rapid response" mode where quick answers are sought, i find it
difficult to accept that as marxists we are not equipt to analyze and
work through issues that are in the process of unfolding.  if the only
thing that we can say something aboutare events that have already taken
place and are decided, i would have to say marxism itself as a
revolutionary theory is bankrupt and useless other than another available
discourse for academics to stake thier claim in the university/publishing
environment.

my purpose of bringing the oklahoma bombing into this discussion list is
because history is being made as we speak, decisions are being made, and
new ideological and material forms are taking shape.  it seems to me that
this is precisely what we should be talking about--but not just the
oklahoma bombing, but other contemporary issues as well.  and i am
arguing this not to say that marxists are all simply academics, or that
the kind of philosophical debates taking place on this list are not
important--i have gone to great lengths in my own work and institution
that i work within to argue for the necessity of philosophy.  but, there
is something all to comfortable to me about discussing the subtleties of
the cpu's postion on race and other things for example, in the midst of
events like the oklahoma bombing.  the question i put to myself in th
midst of this incident was how do i as a marxist respond to this--i have
the theoretical framework to see the emerging ideological formations
being solidified in response to this bombing and there is something that
seems terribly wrong with suggesting that one must wait for the dust to
settle before one can say anything.  especially in the midst of a
discussion list composed of marxists!

are we afraid of being wrong?  has dialectics been subjugated to the
status of bourgeois philosophy?  if marxism is a theory of praxis, one
that can apprehend history in motion (if we remember our oh so expensive
educations and hours reading marxist theory) what is the reluctance in
doing just that?--to collectively make sense of this incident in the
process of unfolding.

maybe i am getting all this wrong, but i for one believe that their is
any natural connection between a climate of grief and anger and
irrationality--that is not to say that it does not happen, but as
marxists we know this to be a particular kind of connection, one that is
based upon a common-sensical notion of how events take place.  we,
however, believe in connections between events and history, between the
local and the global, and in the politics of the now...or maybe once
again i am mistaken.  i would have no problem in not discussing this
issue if there were a compelling theoretically justified argument, but
thus far, all i can read the above response is unjustified discipline.

help me out here...am i deluded, am i a dialectically impared
revolutionary marxist that has lost his grip on history.  last time i
checked though, all systems were functioning properly.

kt


>
> Thami
> New School for Social Research
> Department of Economics
> New York.
>
>


     --- from list marxism at lists.village.virginia.edu ---

     ------------------



More information about the Marxism mailing list