For Peter Drucker
Xxxx Xxxxx Xxxxxx
xxxxxxxx at xxxxxxxxxxx.xxx
Mon Jan 29 12:52:31 MST 2001
Lou, just wondered. Is this the same Peter Drucker who wrote: _The future of
Industrial Man_ (1943), _The unseen revolution: How pension fund socialism came
to America_ (1976). Defending the triumph of capitalism, he has also writen a
polemical book against Marxism about the issue of post-industrial society.
Your criticism makes perfect sense now!
Louis Proyect wrote:
> Peter, you refer to the "ERN" guerrillas in Colombia in your article in the
> latest ATC. ("The War and the Movement"). For your information, there is no
> such group. You must be thinking of the ELN (Army of National Liberation),
> a pro-Cuba formation. For background on this group and others, check:
> I see that you continue to throw spitballs at Milosevic, even though he has
> been overthrown. What distresses me is the utter lack of analysis of the
> aftermath of the war in ATC. The absence of discussion/protests against
> pogroms against Roma, Serbs, non-chauvinist Albanians in Kosovo would lead
> me to believe that Solidarity agitation over human rights is geared to
> whatever is on the front-burner of the propaganda machine in the USA .
> Finally, this business about "movements" following the Vietnamese, etc.
> uncritically seems utterly innocent of our history. I realize that you were
> too young to be familiar with the Vietnam antiwar movement, but there are
> some good books on the subject, including Fred Halstead's "Out Now" and Tom
> Wells' "The War Within". What we learn from these books is that the
> question of criticizing or not criticizing the NLF or North Vietnamese
> government was never really an issue for the organized movement, least of
> all the Trotskyists who remembered well how their co-thinkers were
> repressed by the Vietnamese Communists following WWII.
> In fact, the outlook of the antiwar movement was much closer to that of
> Workers World Party and Ramsey Clark, whom you castigate in the article. It
> understood that there was no point in denouncing Ho Chi Minh on leaflets or
> from the speaker's platform at mass demonstrations. This, by the way, had
> nothing to do with whether Ho was a more "attractive" figure than Saddem or
> Milosevic. It was related to an understanding that the role of radicals in
> the United States was to focus their fire on their own government.
> It seems to me that the only point to issuing denunciations of Milosevic or
> Saddem Hussein was to make clear to left-liberal circles that we wear white
> hats. Instead of writing polemical attacks on the Ramsey Clarks of the
> world, it seems to me that the Solidarity comrades should do a little
> soul-searching to try to understand why some of your friends like Branka
> Magas have ended up as open defenders of NATO. Or why your support of UN
> troops in East Timor has clashed with the reality of that intervention:
> political and economic domination of the island by Anglo-Australian
> imperialism, rather than Indonesia.
> Louis Proyect
> Marxism mailing list: http://www.marxmail.org/
Xxxx Xxxxx Xxxxxx
Department of Political Science
SUNY at Albany
Nelson A. Rockefeller College
135 Western Ave.; Milne 102
Albany, NY 12222
Shop online without a credit card
RocketCash, a NetZero subsidiary
More information about the Marxism