Re: [Marxism] Moderator's note - it's acceptable for Joaquín but not for Carl?
carlwebb at gmail.com
Sun Aug 28 14:51:31 MDT 2005
I'm confused. Is this note just to me or also to Joaquín Bustelo who
was the first to post this phrase on Marx Mail? I'm not ranting. I
only posted a reply to Joaquín using the very same words he used.
And why do you leave out the group Solidarity which also championed my
cause(as you call it)? And Veterans For Peace? And Iraq Veterans
Joaquín wrote "It is amazing to me that people can simply gloss over
the fundamental divide in the world, the one that has powered every
single revolution that has taken place for more than half a century,
the division of the world between oppressor and oppressed nations, in
order to impose on the reality of third world national and
anti-imperialist struggles analysis drawn from what some fucked-up
white communist parties were doing in Europe in the 1930's, an
analysis that completely leaves out of the accounting the national
movements of oppressed peoples."
On 8/28/05, Joaquín Bustelo <jbustelo at bellsouth.net> wrote:
> rrubinelli: "What Fred, (and to a greater extent Walter), was/is
> consistently advocating here in his posts on Ecuador, Bolivia, and
> Brazil is not a united front. It is nothing less, or more, than the old
> popular front, dressed up in "new" "third world" colors, but still with
> no place to go."
> It is amazing to me that people can simply gloss over the fundamental
> divide in the world, the one that has powered every single revolution
> that has taken place for more than half a century, the division of the
> world between oppressor and oppressed nations, in order to impose on the
> reality of third world national and anti-imperialist struggles analysis
> drawn from what some fucked-up white communist parties were doing in
> Europe in the 1930's, an analysis that completely leaves out of the
> accounting the national movements of oppressed peoples.
> Was Fidel's participation in the Cuban governments of early 1959
> "popular frontism?" And seeing how this led directly to the
> expropriation of the bourgeoisie as a class, ought we not to be for this
> sort of pop frontism? And how useful is an analytical framework that
> encompasses both counterrevolutionary and revolutionary policies? How
> does it help us understand anything AT ALL?
On 8/28/05, Louis Proyect <lnp3 at panix.com> wrote:
> Carl wrote:
> >And last time I checked Castro was still white.
> Carl, this was in the body of a message with an subject heading that
> referred to a "fucked-up white communist". This is unacceptably stupid and
> crude. I have cut you some slack on this list because your cause has been
> championed (rather foolishly) by the International Socialist Organization,
> which is an important group on the American left, and by Workers World
> Party, a much less important sect. But there are limits. I cannot allow
> such rants here because they degrade the level of discussion to
> unacceptable levels.
More information about the Marxism