In re catastrophism in propaganda
CharlesB at SPAMCNCL.ci.detroit.mi.us
Mon Oct 2 13:25:47 MDT 2000
>>> L.WILLMS at link-f.frankfurt.org 09/30/00 10:40AM >>>
schrieb CharlesB at CNCL.ci.detroit.mi.us (Charles Brown)
in s9d4958d.071 at mail.ci.detroit.mi.us
ueber Re: In re catastrophism in propaganda
CB> CB: When you say "But Lenin doesn't panic..." you make it seem like I
CB> am panicing or saying we should panic in response to the possible
CB> impending catastrophe,
I'm sorry if my words conveyed this impression.
CB> BUT I didn't.
That's more or less what I understood: you argue _against_
catastrophism, as do I. I just want to defend Lenin against any
charges which might be levelled against him, that he was a
CB: I'd say more he was not a panicmongerer.
Frankly, I disagree that he was not a catastrophist. Lenin was not exaggerating when
he used the threat of catastrophe in propaganda. The article I posted the title of
used the specific words "Impending Catastrophe".
WWI and WWII were catastrophes. WWII was barbarism.The Viet Nam war was a catastrophe
for the Viet Namese. As was were the contra wars of the 70's for Nicaragua, Angola,
So, the warnings against catastrophe by Communists have not been "chicken littlism".
More information about the Marxism