[Marxism] Moderator's note

Waistline2 at aol.com Waistline2 at aol.com
Thu Jun 17 14:03:31 MDT 2004


In a message dated 6/17/2004 2:48:56 PM Central Standard Time, lnp3 at panix.com 
writes:
I have known David Walters for nearly 10 years on the Internet. He might 
not always express himself fluently in prose, but he was referring to 
the government of China beyond any doubt. We have had two outbursts in 
the past couple of days about formulations such as these. Since I am 
thick-skinned, I didn't mind being accused of being objectively 
pro-imperialist because I used the term British Isles. However, this 
business about white chauvinism has no business here. Just because 
somebody expresses himself imprecisely, we should not engage in the kind 
of condemnation that was ubiquitous to the 1960s when small 
revolutionary groups were always purging people for having one sort of 
prejudice or another. There certainly is male chauvinism, white 
chauvinism, etc. on the left, but until I see an egregious case of this 
kind on the list, I am inclined to urge people to refrain from such 
characterizations.
Reply

We do not criticize countries. Once this is pointed out to persist is white 
chauvinism. I always leave room for correct on this form of exchange. I made no 
estimate on dam building in China one way or another . . . which is my 
choose. To criticize a country is flat out wrong and one must admit wrong in 
exposition. 

This is horribly wrong. 

I can go not further is articlating my view on the bourgeois property 
relations in China ... which I have never reframed from speaking on because the 
goddamn chauvinism critici=zing China blocks the path. 

Let David W. and yourself admit this is a wrong form of exposition. 

I left the door open for our errors. David repeats the rank white chauvinism 
which is at the basis of the initial discussion concerning the Yellow Peril. 

Then again those inclined towards white chauvinism cannot never admit an 
error because they are front men of the liberal bourgeoisie. 

Admitting an error prove to everyone there is no reason to confuse one - me, 
with the ideological ranting of the imperialist. 

I told you your anti-Sovietism and anti-China stance would prove your 
politics. 

Criticize China . . . if one wrote outside of America criticized America we 
would know them to be a trend within the bourgeoisie. What you and David wrote 
did not even criticize the government of China . . . it cirticixzed China and 
you will not apologize because of your arrogance. 

I challenge you and David W. to prove your merit and history in the working 
class movement. Both of you speak as individuals with an anti-Soviet and 
anti-China bent. 

The proof is your insistence on criticizing China.  

We make mistakes . . . come forward and clean it up or stand charged as a 
white chauvinists deviator. 

I know this is the thinking of Stalinists and unreconstructed Stalinism. 

Stalin is the answer. Stalin is the reason Stalin is the real question and 
not the chauvinism of the imperial centers. Bow is a good time to scream "its 
Stalin fault." 

Rotten white chauvinism. 

It all comes out in the wash and no one can hide their views in the course of 
intellectual discourse. 


Melvin P. 



More information about the Marxism mailing list