RUSSIA needs a war on drugs??? -Reply

Scott Marshall Scott at rednet.org
Wed Jun 14 07:03:02 MDT 1995


>On Tue, 13 Jun 1995, Scott Marshall wrote:
>
>> >Scott, are you willfully misreading me, or what?
>
>Lisa: Scott is just being a condescending prick and turning your
>message into a chance to flame against his political opponents.

I see Walter, in all your condecending rightousness, you've decided that if
I strongly disagree with the notion that the fall of the SU was a good thing
then I have to be flaming someone. But the dismissal of arguments and the
sweeping assumptions based on throw-away lines about 'Stalinism' are of
course the well reasoned and mild stuff of academia. Excuse me while I spit
impolitely.

>Scott: Not speaking for Justin, but I, and probably a great majority of
>marxists who hold a critique of Stalinism, greatly resent this type of
>characterization of our argument.  Neither Justin nor I would even say
>socialism existed in the USSR to begin with, so your point is moot.

Well excuse me. I guess i missed the part where god (dog in an earlier post)
decided that you and the "majority of marxists who hold a critique of
Stalinism" were declared right and that settled the question. Must have
slept through that class.

>All
>it shows is your blindsighted insistence that a disastrous and disgusting
>social system -- which the working people you supposedly stand for
>themselves overthrew in a large part of the world -- was a good and
>positive thing worthy of fighting for.  I don't agree, and I see the
>overthrow of these bureacratic societies as something good.  I don't like
>what has been erected in its place, and I would fight for a genuine
>revolutionary democratic socialism, but your ilk has done such a great
>job of discrediting that cause that it is difficult to do so.

Excuse me if I disagree - which started this whole thing anyway. Again to
belabor the point. The working people you are supposed to be interested in
got tremendous harm and suffering from the setback to socialism. You can
pritify it any way you want but it's just academic petty foggery - it's real
hunger, homelessness, increased drug addiction, collapsing economy, return
of deseases that had been elinminated under the terrible social system they
had especially nutrition related ones, etc etc. But you, in the best
academic style shared by those who agree with you, can blythly pronounce
that you don't agree with that part of what's happening and are fighting (or
will fight in the future) to make it right. Excuse me if that's cold
comfort. It's like saying a train wreck is good, and while we deplore the
death and destruction, we've said all along we don't like trains and propose
to build a much better system of transportation in the future that doesn't
need tracks of fuel. And BTW it's all the engineers fault - you know that
engineer from 30 years ago.
>

As to my ilk. I rather think of myself as an Elk. And yes we elk have made
it most difficult for you moose to build your perfect world. Like other
moose you blame other herds for your lack of ability to reach the working
class with your message. Most moose (or is it meese) in my experience, after
they have exhausted themselves in battle with other herds, end up bitter and
blaming even their own herd for not seeing and understanding their correct
version of things. Perhaps it's because you spend a disproportionate amount
of your time attacking other herds rather than attacking the hunters? Our
herd is growing rather nicely thank you and we are very little bothered by
the antics of moose.


>Instead of attacking Justin, perhaps you should be paying attention to
>your own ideas, which are themselves largely responsible for the
>discrediting of socialism in the eyes of the vast majority of the world's
>population.

It always amazes me how the bankruptcy of this line isn't more apparent to
even moose. The big bad elk have done it again.

>Or perhaps you'd like to win the western working class over
>to a conception of "socialism" which includes corruption, censorship,
>hyper-bureacracy, inefficiency, and imperialism as its basic features?

I hope this is a rhetorical question?

>I call parties that support N. Korea, the
>former USSR, China, etc. Stalinist parties because they uphold the same
>analysis and the same actions that Stalin and his supporters upheld.

Hmm....isn't this just a little simplistic. Are you in your thinking able to
collapse so much into such a simple single category. I suppose its basic
herd - on some points to be overly complex and nuanced and on others to be
so onesided and simplistic.

Deadpan,
Scott



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

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



More information about the Marxism mailing list