"Anti-imperialism" Swedish imperialist style

hariette spierings hariette at easynet.co.uk
Sat Oct 12 06:22:20 MDT 1996


>I also live in Sweden, by the way. Which will of course amply justify
>anything you care to say about me in the future. Just for the record,
>though, I am not an exile - at least not in the political sense. Olaechea,
>Proyect and Gary have already drawn the inescapable conclusion that by
>favourably comparing the *quality* of Rodwell's contributions (irrespective
>of his political positions, which I have not commented on) with the
>consistently abysmal quality of Proyect's efforts I must necessarily be in
>cahoots with Rodwell and, by extension with Malecki - and if loopy Louis has
>his way - with the entire population of Sweden.
>
>Stuart Sheild
>


Maybe in certain circles in Sweden too what counts is the form and not the
content?.  Rodwell's literary form maybe "favourably compared" to that of
quite a few people in this list, but its contents are downright
counter-revolutionary and anti-communist.  The same thing can be said of the
PROVEN AND SELF-CONFESSED snitch George Orwell, which put his literary
skills and embellished the form of his scribbles in order to implement
British imperialist/MI6 anti-communist policy.

Why is it that all liberals are so enamoured of form?  The form of the
Soviet, its "council" appearance and its trappings, not, however, its
contents as proletarian power on the move is exactly what enamours these
gentlemen, and thus they belittle proletarian led revolutionary actions as
"petty-bourgeois student movements", "peasant movements", etc..  These
"Intergalactics" had the same position vis-a-vis the May 4th "student"
movement in China.

What is the point of "contributions" in this list to be well written and
"polite" if, at the end of the day, these are counter-revolutionary
contributions? What is there of intrinsic good in being "polite" to the
enemies of the revolution while they spew the most disgusting and personal
allegations against the actual and living revolutionary leaders?

Form above content is the bourgeois outlook in everything, from art to politics!

It is no surprising that Rodwell - like Orwell before him - proves himself
to be all form and zero revolutionary content.  In fact his content is
OVERTLY counter-revolutionary.  He deserves all he gets, however crude the
form may be. After all, Marxism is for the masses, not for Madame
Pompadour's boudoir!

Adolfo Olaechea



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





More information about the Marxism mailing list