Richard.Bos at hagcott.meganet.co.uk
Tue Aug 6 23:42:06 MDT 1996
Rubyg580 at aol.com wrote:
> Exactly my point, Lisa. What, other than "disruptions from within"
> do these EYEnet articles represent? How do they expose an
> incorrect political line? How do they support the revolution in Peru?
> They barely mention it! What do they say about the politics of the
> named persons? What do they call on people to do about correcting
> the situation?
> In fact the EYEnet articles NEGATE political line. They give honest
> activists who are trying to understand the contradictions and
> conflicts within the international support movement for the People's
> War ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to help them understand the issues.
> The ONLY forces they aid are those seeking to disrupt and disunify
> the movement.
> Whatever game (his word, not mine) Ken THINKS he's playing,
> COINTELPRO is the game he IS playing, objectively, and the
> imperialist system is what he is serving, regardless of whose
> "friend" he claims to be. His articles on the New Flag are not
> anything even close to political polemic: they are dirty pig snitch
> work, and if that's not what he wants to be doing then he needs
> to repudiate it.
I think that by their very nature the eyeNET articles cannot expose the
political line. They were not written for Marxists to read, and would be
boring for other people who would not understand the technicalities in a
one off article. It was written to expose a conspiracy which to a
journalist in any medium is "a good story".
I have kept out of the debate on the PCP, but the more I read of what
Adolfo says, the more it makes sense. When you have been through a flame
war, and strong language has been used, it is hard to see through the
personal animosities that have built up.
New Worker Online http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/2853
--- from list marxism at lists.village.virginia.edu ---
More information about the Marxism