Neco-con socialism is fascism 4 - end

Waistline2 at Waistline2 at
Sun Sep 7 12:57:58 MDT 2003

In a message dated 9/7/03 9:30:29 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
dmschanoes at writes:

>End of parsing.  MP's subsequent analysis is highly thoughtful and
provocative.  I am not sure I have grasped all of it, and I think I disagree with some
elements, but having said that, I know MP well enough to know he will provide
extensive amplifications of his analysis of the essential new qualitative
ingredients and how that translates for concrete action.  I do remember way back
when MP and I were constantly at loggerheads being knocked out by his direct
advocacy of a labor party for such action, a position I held and hold.



You grasp all of it.

I do not know how to say this right way but political tradition does not
eclipse economic logic. I have been on Marxline on and off - sometimes the off is
my own stupidity, but no one talks about the economic logic of social
revolution other than you and it makes sense. I do not and have never argued that
uneven and combined development is not an absolute law of not capital, but human
development. Nor have I every written anything contrary to the fact that the
"uneven and combined development" is itself uneven. This is elementary Marxism.

The proponents of the political theory of permanent revolution avoid Marx
economic theory like a thief avoiding the place he has just burglarized and when
I challenge them they scream "Stalin" and I react because you are attacking me
not on the basis of economic theory but my concept of the American union.

I actually read - several times (six to be exact), your pieces on
overproduction and followed the money - or rather economic logic, and it is insanity to
dispute them. How can I say you have not described the logic - on the basis of
Marx, when you pinpoint the essential ingredients? If my political tradition
is different - and it is, (not really because you did that stint in auto and
understand the real logic of American industrial workers) what on earth has that
to do with pinpointing devaluation as a law, not of the price form, but of
commodity production and the permanence of overproduction at this damn point in
history? That is to say, on the basis of your political tradition you
disclosed the law of the decay of value which cannot appear as anything other than
devaluation - overproduction. At least you followed Marx and the wave of history
carries one to the new qualitative junctures and then you said, "Damn - a 40
percent change in the labor content of auto." Forty percent of anything is
enough to say something big has happened. Ain't that common sense in America?

Fu*k price because you can fool all of the people some of the time. The way I
say this is  - - - -- the reason that valueless products of the same quality
and quantity can compete in the market and fetch the same price as the same
products with more labor is because of uneven and combined goddamn development.
However, even price - sorry, the price form, is going to be drawn in the
direction of value or towards zero and not way from zero. Towards Zero is a hero in
history as totality and commodity production. Why I got to argue the obvious
and site thirty years of writing?

Your articulation of the law of value as it is expressed in the
overproduction crisis we face today - not in 1870, is broad enough to frame the question in
a consistent Marxist manner without squabbles over details of capital
formation and industry sectors.  The lack of response to your articles on
overproduction meant that everyone agrees with your underlying theory grid or they do not
understand why you equate a mass of surplus capital as the face of
overproduction. It follows that your approach to the "thing" in the Middle East - middle
and east of what? or rather Iraq is about devaluation no matter what its
political expression or how you say it. Wasn't nothing wrong with the way you said

Here you speak of devaluation as not the price form but the value form and
everyone shuts up and pretends you have not stated an obvious Marxist
conclusion. Then you are told - pardon, we are told, "you do not understand why oil is

I could bite a brick in half and pay for new teeth with my medical benefits.
I happened to hate the dentist. Fu*k overthrowing bourgeois property. . .lets
get the dentist! Here is a man in my mouth in a way I do not appreciate at
all.:-) (Now the entire sector of Marxist dentist will be on my ass.)

Political tradition means we articulate things a certain way because we have
entered a new era of history and bring with us our carpetbag. I am sensitive
about that carpet bag so be careful - my bags stay packed and the man that mess
with me is in trouble. Those who cling to the doctrines are fools and will be
run over by history.

Mr. DMS, - pardon dms, I have worked with every political tendency all of my
life and memories - tradition, do not make the man or rather person. What we
do in the moment defies tradition by definition or cements us in that which is
by definition dead.  I am not going to die over some dumb ass old doctrine.

Then I write a certain way - flat but phat, because I wrote the leaflets for
the workers and they think in English - American English as it evolves.

Pardon, but I shall slay the Neo-Con socialist before they consolidate. Here
is a mutherfuc*er that will be engaged on the basis of no holds barred. He
advocated carrying the bourgeois revolution - capitalist development, (the
bourgeois property relations) to the less developed world and it is I who in history
made permanent this "less development" and backwardness in the most
contradictory way possible - the under belly is deep and painful.  How a mutherfu*ker
evolves simultaneously as the most advanced and backwards is not theory but the
reality of America. This is too much to bear.

He - neo-con socialism, shall die by the sword of theory and be compelled to
jump from the furthest corner of the earth. NO MORE CAPITALIST DEVELOPMENT,
YOU CRAZY FU*K>.  All you shall see is the daggers in my eyes to pierce your
cruel heart.

No, I shall not be polite. God, I love being backwards at the appropriate

Melvin P.

PLEASE clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.

More information about the Marxism mailing list