to Julio(was Re: OK, let's put an end . . .)
dayneg at SPAMaros.net
Mon Jun 18 10:50:41 MDT 2001
thank you for your more personal response.
i had been wondering if you were an intellectual provocateur,
simply reversing the presumed or stereotypical dependency theory
fascination with the most oppressed in the 'third world' to call for a
focus on the least oppressed in the 'first world'- and for your amusement
using your impressive knowledge of Marx to fluster privileged, largely
and i also considered, as i indicated on the list, that you
should be taken at face-value (as you appeared to me) as a very
privileged 'leftist' yourself - a strictly intellectual 'Marxist' who had
theorized a lack of interest in the class struggle going on immediately
around you in Mexico.
it is obvious to me that you can contribute a lot to this list. i
hope you will decide to share at least some of your experiences,
observations, thoughts about developments in Mexico.
On Sun, 17 Jun 2001, Julio Huato wrote:
. . .
> For several reasons, I have become deeply interested in the workers'
> movement in the United States. The grounds for Mexicans to be interested in
> the United States expand by the day. Even if my concern were exclusively
> the direct interests of Mexican workers, increasingly, the movement in the
> United States has a direct impact on them, and that would be reason enough
> for me to look at it. In brief, I don't see these issues as off limits to
> me as a Mexican.
DG: i agree, no doubt about it; and of course you have as much right to
ask for information/provoke discussion about the workers movement in the
U.S. as i have to ask about the workers movement in Mexico. hopefully we
will be discussing the workers movement in Northamerica which will be
making the capitalist class realize that NAFTA can also stimulate
international proletarian solidarity.
> Finally, nowhere has Louis required that participants in this list show
> experience as activists or organizers. If Louis required it, the discussion
> would not improve. I don't have any idea how many non-activists are in this
> list and I don't care. The best I can do is look at each one's
> contributions on their own merits. Neither has Louis required that the
> subject matter of the discussions focus on concrete, historical class
> struggles, and avoid theory. IMO, the current state of revolutionary
> Marxism in the world doesn't call for tiptoeing around thorny theoretical
> issues, however settled or sacrosanct they may appear to us.
DG: i generally agree although i am more interested in revolutionary
politics. i think we marxists are overdeveloped theoretically compared to
our underdevelopment in political work and organization. (and yes, i agree
with Lenin that without revolutionary theory there can be no revolutionary
More information about the Marxism