Nationalism - the fascist method of dms ?

Jurriaan Bendien bendien at tomaatnet.nl
Fri Jul 18 17:54:12 MDT 2003


Your reasoning capacities and ethical capacities are absolutely appallingly
bad. You are so blind, that you are incapable of reading what I wrote.

You wrote:

Calling people fascist because they challenge you
to provide a concrete analysis that supports your
view isn't exactly erudite, sophisticated, or
revolutionary.  At best it's stupid, at worst a
smear. You can make your selection.

Reply:

I did not say YOU are fascist, I said your political method is fascist and
totalitarian, because I object violently to leftists seeking to impose their
so-called "programme" on other people with bossy, "know it all" methods.
These leftists are politically incompetent, because they do not understand
the meaning and function of a political programme, and how that political
programme is arrived at. They are fundamentalists who want to bash the
Marxist Bible into people, and I regard them as enemies of the people. Their
concept of organisation is "how I make you do volunteer work for me", which
is the organisational theory of social trash without genuine morality and
culture. My objection is not against you as a person, it is against your
political prescriptions and mode of discourse, i.e. your behaviour.
Consequently, I specifically said, I do not wish to engage in discussion
with you, until you have dropped your social-fascist methods.

You said:

I have submitted to the list concrete analyses to
support my views about...oil, nationalism, imperialism,
overproduction.  I don't think they're flawless, but I
think they identify something you disregard-- the
actual determinants of social struggles.

I have read many of your analyses, and I found them insightful and
provocative sometimes. But this is one thing, political method is quite
another. In my life, I have come across hundreds of academically schooled
people who could make fine analyses of all sorts of subjects, but when it
came to political persuasion, political organisation and political culture,
they became little Hitlers, little despots, tyrants, sectarian monsters,
manipulators. They sought to transplant the methods of academia into the
political area, thinking that their superior academic knowledge would
instantly make them superior in politics as well. But that is not the case
at all, because political activity requires close attention to human
relations in a way which academically schooled people often pay little
attention to. They might pontificate about "class", but in reality piss and
shit all over ordinary workingclass people, and you in fact jibe me for even
referring to "ordinary people", and since you do that, I know just exactly
what cup of meat I am dealing with here. You're just a hipster.

You wrote:

Haven't seen you write one concrete word about the actual
conditions of production in an oppressed "nationality," the
actual relations of classes in oppressed and oppressor
nations.

Reply:

Well first of all, I am not an academic but a worker, at present an
unemployed worker. I read in my spare time, or for a job. That is the way it
went, in a lot of my life.  I make a lot of my "analyses" through my
relationships with people. I do not write up those "analyses" often, and do
not earn academic credit for them. They are just in my head. I have no
particular desire to demonstrate my great erudition and intellectual
capacity through flaunting my analyses of particular circumstances on the
world, that is not my motive, and you have to have some political nouse in
this. If I do not say a lot of things I could say, there is a very good
reason for that. I do not aim for intellectual credit, I aim for a certain
experience, and for that experience, I have to prepare myself in certain
ways, it means that I will not talk about many things except to indicate the
general line of my thinking. You aren't even interested in my circumstances
of life, my history, my future, and why should I bother with you in that
case anyway ? All you want to do is bash me over the head with your deformed
idiotic notions of "class", showing contempt for me, "class" being a subject
about which I happen to have thought about for 25 years and have a hell of a
lot more personal experience of than you.

You say:

Everything you offer is a moral imperative, a posture,  pose.

Reply:

Certainly, there is a very strong moral imperative, because a lot of
leftwing culture is a shit culture, and I don't want to have anything to do
with it. A lot of it is despotic, fascist, anti-libertarian, conservative,
narrowminded and trashy. And your stinking personal accusations fall
precisely into that category. You might say, aren't you exaggerating, aren't
you engaging in a ""flare" ? Perhaps, but I am quite happy to exaggerate in
this case, because I know your trashy, jibing ilk. But you are quite wrong
to think that it is a posture or a pose. You are the poser, venting
banalities about "class" and what do you know about it. I lived the things I
talk about, in so many ways, but you will never know.

I very happily mix with people with whose viewpoint I do not agree, or do
not entirely agree, because they are capable of a genuine, sincere dialogue
based on mutual respect and stimulating conversation. To a tyrannical
leftist like you, this is all liberalism or some such thing, for example,
because we do not mention "class" and other trendy words in every second
sentence. But from my point of view, you are just engaging in petty fascist
maneouvres, you're another leftist with a heart full of hate and contempt
for fellow socialists, seeking not to educate, but flaunt his erudition and
overblown ego and "correct" the working class. In reality, you hate the
working class, the working class is just a "thing" for you. You haven't
studied the subject and you know fuck all about it.

As for myself, I am not afraid to debate with anybody. I will debate with
you, or Bush, or Blair, or Wallerstein, or any other luminary. And if the
debate occurs in a civilised manner, that's fine, I will respect them. But
if it does nor occur in a mature, civilised and cultured way, the person
involved is likely to get a swift kick in the head from me.

The only reason I decided to write this, is because you riled my ire with
your puberal, patronising, pharisaical, slimy, fake-lefty attitudes. With a
guy like Tom O'Lincoln, I know what I've got. I can criticise Tom, Tom can
criticise me, I might alert him to certain things, he might correct me in
certain ways, we might do it wrong or do it right, but we know where we are.
It is the same with Phil, Les, Louis or any number of people I could
mention. But you just talk crap, so get off the grass.

J.












More information about the Marxism mailing list