albatrosrojo2000 at yahoo.com
Thu Jul 24 20:06:01 MDT 2003
--- Louis Proyect <lnp3 at panix.com> escribió: >
> >I want to ask everyone else on the list, what's the
> point of discussing this with this person? This is
the most primitive, mindless, infantile kind of
sectarian ultraleftism imaginable. The demand is
"inadequate" -- well, name me a demand that isn't
Why the impatience and the expediency of the threat of
expulsion? If what you say is true, let's people make
their own mind and ignore the poster and his comments.
> I want to second what José has written. I have mixed
> feelings about David's participation on the list.
He has been unsubbed twice by me for stepping
> out of bounds and once by himself when he got fed up
> with the list.
Again, the question is why the impatience? If people
argued back and forth about the issue, let the issue
exhaust by itself or people realize that is useless to
continue a discussion. Why to cutoff a thread with
threats? As someone who found flaws in most positions
on the issues expressed in that particular thread --
from all sides -- and who chose not to participate in
the thread, I think both Jose and Lou are
> He is about my age and a NYC professional. In
> private exchanges with him, I have learned that he
has never belonged to a Marxist organization. His
> brand of radicalism was very popular in the 1960s
> and he seems to have changed very little since the
time when he first became politicized.
Why is this a disqualifying factor? Most people who
post in this list are not members of any organziation
and some spouse political positions which were either
popular or unpopular in the past. What that has to do
with anything? Really perplexed on this one.
> In any case, it probably does not make sense to
> spend a lot of time in
> debate with him since his views are not reflective
> of any significant
> section of the movement today. For people who were
> around in the 60s like
> me, you will remember that this was not the case
> back then.
Didn't you say couple paragraphs above that "His
brand of radicalism was very popular in the 1960s?"
Then if they are "not reflective of any significant
section of the movement today" why is then that people
needs to instruct others not to discuss with the guy?
For the record: I think Tom kind of hit the nail on
the head when he pointed out - if I understood
correctly - that BOTH the broad attitude towards what
it comes from the movement and the "narrower"
socialist positions not only belong, but need to be
expressed in the movement and for Marxist, the task is
to find the way to *combine* them while not alienating
present and potential allies along the way.
I would add that there is agitation and it is
propaganda and what you say in one and the other
differ greatly and the whole task for revolutionary is
to find the way to progresively shorten the distance
between the content of one and the other.
All the best, as always.
Internet GRATIS es Yahoo! Conexión
4004-1010 desde Buenos Aires. Usuario: yahoo; contraseña: yahoo
Más ciudades: http://conexion.yahoo.com.ar
More information about the Marxism