[Marxism] Re: The Military Programme of the Proletarian Revolution(was Re...
Jscotlive at aol.com
Jscotlive at aol.com
Wed May 18 09:21:29 MDT 2005
In a message dated 18/05/2005 14:12:07 GMT Daylight Time,
MLause at cinci.rr.com writes:
Jscotlive at aol.com continues to confuse moralizing nonsense with Marxism.
I'm always amused when someone, like yourself, attempts to claim the Marxist
high ground, and does so without offering anything more than a stale rant in
Earlier Jscotlive at aol.com suggested demoralising the troops by
denouncing them for war crimes--a position he now sedates into merely
"criticising" them. Yet, what's most objectionable here is not the
dishonesty in argument (which implies that Jscotlive at aol.com regards it
with all the importance of some junior high school debate).
Sorry if I neglected to include the term 'for war crimes' in my second
posting on the subject. Ludicrously, you ascribe the omission to a shift in
position on my part. It was not, it was simply an omission. For the purpose of
clarity, allow me to restate that position now: 'US troops in Iraq should be
denounced for committing WAR CRIMES - on behalf of the US ruling class.'
Really, is this the best you can do?
Most working people look at the people in uniform and see younger family
members or the kids of their coworkers and neighbors. They understand
what Jscotlive at aol.com does not...that the recruitment ads and the
recruiters offer these youngsters way get more independent of their
parents, to get a job skill, to earn benefits, and to help people.
yes, and most Iraqis see the people in uniform and see their oppressors,
murderers and torturers. As an internationalist, and MARXIST, my sympathy and
solidarity lies with them one hundred percent. Once the troops recognise that
they are also victims and attempt to do something about it by organising
against the war, by refusing to obey orders, then and only then will I support
Finally, it should be very simple to understand the difference between
those with power who are beyond their reach and those without power who
are within their reach. And it should be equally simple to understand
the pitfalls of focusing our hostility about the former on the latter.
Your talent for meaningless semantics is the most impressive aspect of your
I haven't come across anything in Marx about supporting the troops of an
imperial power while they're slaughtering a colonised people with reckless
abandon. I draw your attention to my comparison with Nazi troops during the Second
World War in occupied Europe. Perhaps, if you examine your motives, you
might be sympathetic to the troops for no other reason than they are American
troops. Perhaps, I don't know. I do know that, whilst active with the LA Branch
of the ANSWER Coalition and the IAC up until I returned to the UK at the turn
of the year, a fear of criticising the troops was prevalent, almost to the
point of neuroses in actual fact. This absolutely was a fear created by the
propaganda machine of the ruling class.
Finally, there does exist a moral component to Marxism. It is unfortunately
often lost in all the hard economic and cold social science which lies at its
core. Ultimately, Marxism is about ending the exploitation of man by man. If
that isn't morality, I don't know what is.
More information about the Marxism