Forwarded from Anthony (reply to Michael Davidson)

sherrynstan at igc.org sherrynstan at igc.org
Thu Dec 6 11:55:18 MST 2001


<snip>I said I thought the enemy was "the system," but
perhaps that really is too easy.  So please tell me,
tough guys, which grieving families I'm allowed to
sympathize with, and please tell me exactly which
people are in the enemy camp.<snip>

There's no reason to bait us with the "tough guy" stuff.  We can all grieve for whomever we feel empathy, including you.  What's curious to me, however, generally and not necessarily with reference to you, is how some so-called leftists rush to the fore to remind us about sensitivity when the WTC and the Pentagon are attacked.  All this business about grieving families is fine, but in the current context, that is, the discussion about Churchill's remarks, it strikes me as a grand evasion of the realities of class struggle [in all its dimensions]... and yet another rhetorical trap to demobilize us with appeals to liberal morality.  In the struggle between white oppressors and black oppressed, I am taking sides.  In the struggle between workers and bosses, I am taking sides.  In the struggle between male oppressors and oppressed women, I am taking sides.  In the struggle against homophobia, I am taking sides.  And in the struggle against imperialism, I am taking sides.  I didn't!
!
!
 make the sides, but I'm not about to pretend they don't exist.  Your implied categorical imperative about violence erases the fact that some relations are antagonistic and oppressive, enforced by violence of the oppressor, and ridiculously implies that people must continue to submit.


~~~~~~~
PLEASE clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.



More information about the Marxism mailing list