[Marxism] Kyrgyzstan 'Regime Change' Masterminded By West

Louis Proyect lnp3 at panix.com
Thu Mar 31 20:59:57 MST 2005


David O:
>  The archive is available for anyone,
>so you check for yourself...  He has since ceased with this practice, and 
>I'm sure he
>has his reasons why, but that's not to say that he not capable of 
>providing excellent
>analysis when he wants...
>Certaintly better than your  haphazard "marxist" take on the caucasuses...

Actually, Rozoff was on the a-list for a month or so, but stormed off in a 
huff when I challenged him. And that's a list that is much more friendly to 
his point of view than my own.

>Another reasons for not posting my own analyses is that I'm perpetually 
>short on
>time (for example, I'm wasting precious time bothering with this reply), 
>so it's simply
>easier to "cross post" articles as it's means a few clicks of my mouse 
>rather than
>typing in an entirely new subject heading, and then previewing it with my own
>analysis.

I don't mind it when you post something that is uncontroversial. I only 
object to crosspostings that contain an implicit defense of Putin's foreign 
policy. What attitude to take toward the the Caucasus is extremely 
important. It would be useful for somebody like Rozoff to actually spell 
out a Marxist approach, but I am afraid that neither you, nor Rozoff, nor 
Yarker seems capable of stringing together a 500 word Marxist analysis on 
the topic. If crossposting items from the bourgeois press or the Kremlin 
Ministry of Truth is supposed to be substitute for this, then I am not sure 
how serious your commitment to Marxism is. Since this is probably the only 
issue you have been truly engaged with here on an ongoing basis, one might 
expect you to assume the political responsibility to spell out your ideas. 
That is, if you have any beyond putting a minus where Washington puts a plus.

>  I don't see many iin here doing this either ..And I  imagine too that 
> some of
>the less frequent posters at marxmial are in a similar situation..Beside I 
>assume
>anyone here can think on their own...They don't need more (or 
>you)  dissecting
>"fact" from fiction, the "truth" from spin. Unlike yourself, i'm also not 
>keen to be
>always lending my opinion to every issue I post to marxmail as doing so 
>inevitably
>elicits debate and, as mentioned already, I'm very short on time...But I 
>suppose
>you're now establishing a new rule on this matter (what is this # 4 8 848 
>321? -- the
>David Quarter rule)?

I have no plans to unsub you, although I have failed to detect much more 
than a glancing familiarity with Marxism in your interventions here. 
Basically, I regard the Rozoff, Yarker, Chussodovsky, Jared Israel 
(pre-Zionist implosion) approach to be of dubious value. It would be of 
some use to have a full-scale debate over how their methodology differs. 
However, Jared Israel didn't like being challenged by Mark Jones here over 
how to evaluate Putin and finally ran off, as Rozoff ran from the a-list.

>But don't take my word for it, send Jim an invite?

I have a better idea. Why don't you carve out 3 hours over the next week or 
two to compose your thoughts and write an explicit defense of Russian 
foreign policy that is implicit in all your crosspostings.

>You have extremely warped opinion of your importance and contribution to 
>leftist
>politics and marxism, let alone of your worth to the  world...I'll just 
>assume that the
>above is you're usual resorting to slimy, backhanded, tactics to "defend" 
>your
>position b/c you have nothing further of substance to add...I've become so
>accumstomed to this type of "debating" from you  that I'll save myself the 
>agony of
>responding...

I am sorry you find being challenged so burdensome. But this list is meant 
for debate, after all. Perhaps if you just stopped posting items that gave 
backhanded support to Putin's foreign policy, you wouldn't have to put up 
with being questioned.

>"Neutrality", If you aren;'t already aware, is taking a side, at teast it 
>is where I'm from...
>  Nothing occurs in a vacuum... And As I already stated,
>there is a difference between defending a state (say, Zimbabwe) against 
>military attack and
>  defending its politics especially when the alternative is to
>allow a country with a far greater record of human rights violations (ie., 
>genocide)
>impose its will...

What are the "politics" of Zimbabwe that you are defending? Like these?

Southern Africa Report
SAR, Vol 11, No 4, July 1996
GAY BASHING IN ZIMBABWE:

BY IDEN WETHERELL

Iden Wetherell is assistant editor of the weekly Zimbabwe Independent

Zimbabwe may soon find itself once again embroiled in a row over gay rights 
as the World Council of Churches prepares to host its 1998 assembly in 
Harare. The small Southern African country made headlines last year when 
President Robert Mugabe vilified homosexuals in a speech at the opening of 
the Zimbabwe International Book Fair whose theme was human rights. "If we 
accept homosexuality as a right, as is being argued by the association of 
sodomists and sexual perverts, what moral fibre shall our society ever have 
to deny organised drug addicts, or even those given to bestiality, the 
rights they might claim under the rubrics of individual freedom and human 
rights?" Mugabe told a shocked audience that included Nobel laureates 
Nadine Gordimer and Wole Soyinka.

full: http://www.africafiles.org/article.asp?ID=3877

>  Whenever the need arises, I'll make sure to consult with you that I'm 
> taking a
>proper "marxist" position...

A better idea would be to simply stop forwarding Kremlin propaganda,

>  News to me.... He is most certainly not opposed to funnelling millions 
> to Russian opposition parties...
>I'd be surprised if his slush funds haven't reached the Chechan 
>"liberation" parties,
>by some direction...

I'd be surprised if you've ever read anything on Chechnya except the slop 
from Rozoff's trough.


Louis Proyect
Marxism list: www.marxmail.org 





More information about the Marxism mailing list