For some Marxists who have odd notions about what a worker is.
wwchi at enteract.com
Thu Sep 27 01:09:24 MDT 2001
From: ermadog at freenet.edmonton.ab.ca <ermadog at freenet.edmonton.ab.ca>
To: marxism at lists.panix.com <marxism at lists.panix.com>
Date: Thursday, September 27, 2001 12:28 AM
Subject: For some Marxists who have odd notions about what a worker is.
(Most of this post, which repeats the business about the WTC dead being
unlamentable Masters of the Universe and not real workers, clipped)
You know something? I was willing to give you a little slack with this
nonsense about the people who died in the WTC not being workers, because
it's been a rough and emotional time, and denial is one of the defense
mechanisms we all use, and people need time to work through things.
But when you persistently refuse to deal with reality, or address the facts,
such as the fact that over 1000 of the dead were union members, and the rest
of the information at the link I posted earlier, it is getting just plain
unpleasant to read. It is offensive. Furthermore, at this time of war
crisis, we absolutely do not need anyone posing as a Marxist or a
progressive going around and writing such nonsense. I hope to hell you stay
away from any anti-war demonstrations or teach-ins with this crap about how
the WTC victims were 'toasted Masters', because sure as blazes, you will be
the one whom the press chooses to interview in order to prove that we of the
anti-war movement are loonies and enemies of the working class.
José and Louis have written a couple stern notes about the theory that the
CIA was behind the attacks. While I also don't believe that theory, I have
to say that in my estimation your persistence in the line that the WTC dead
were not workers is not one tenth as realistic as the CIA theory, and that
it is 10 times more likely to make the movement repugnant to the workers.
I criticize myself for the liberalism of failing to make my criticisms more
I also don't know what sort of class analysis you think you are doing here:
> the human costs of the decisions made by
>corporate executives - costs which were largely ignored by, for instance,
>the 3500 employees of Morgan Stanley, against whom CorpWatch had organized
>a fax campaign. This fax campaign has been discontinued because, well,
>Morgan Stanley no longer has a fax address as of Sept. 11. Those who wish
>to see the dead of the WTC as innocent victims might want to look a little
>closer at the activities of companies such as this.
Are you saying that all the 3500 employees of Morgan Stanley were actually
members of the bourgeoisie? What percent would you say were members of the
proletariat? You have heard, perhaps, that surplus value comes from
exploiting the proletariat? There must have been some proletarians there,
then, no? So, are you saying that the proletarians at Morgan Stanley were
morally responsible for the fact that their company was involved in the
exploitation of other workers? Can you think of any large capitalist firm
of which this is not true? In general, ALL the work of the military and
economic warfare of the imperialists against the oppressed nations of the
world is done by the proletariat. They make the bombs and transport them,
and they staff the banks as well. Does this make them 'not innocent' in
your view? Should they all quit and get other jobs? They would still be
supporting the war machine with their taxes, you know.
I occasionally run into a utopian pacifist who wants to blame the war
machine on the workers, but it's unsettling to run into the same line on a
PLEASE clip all extraneous text before replying to a message
More information about the Marxism