[Marxism] Seymour/Ayers - continues!
causecollector at msn.com
Fri Dec 5 21:55:56 MST 2008
You miss the point of this discussion. It was started over SDS not being involved in the Vietnam Anti-War Movement after its April 17, 1965 Washington DC protest - which is what the US SWP leadership said - and which my point was that was not true and showed the US SWP Sectarianism.
It had nothing to do with the US SWP having a correct political line on building massive anti-war demnstrations - it is just that is not all that brought the US government defeat in Vietnam - there was of course the Vietnamese who are the most repsonsible for their victory and my point was and remains that SDS and other leftists outside of the US SWP also did important work and effects for the US to stop militarily attacking Vietnam and South East Asia in the 1970's. (The U. S. continued their attacks by then reversing their previous position and supporting the Khmer Rouge against the pro-Vietnamese Cambodian government that overthrew the Khmer Rouge!)
And your part of this discussion was challenging the size of the Nov. 15, 1969 protest at the (In)Justice Department, which I said you were wrong on and was very large - and then you said what happened to all those anti-imperialsists and anti-capitalists who were there - and I replied that many are still active in many issues and are larger in number than what is today left of the US SWP membership.
Why are these two points not possible to accept - and just admit that you might have made a mistake or two - and did not know everything about the Vietnam antiwar Movement and what happened to those involved in it?
I like most everything else you write on this list - and read everything you do send to it - so it is okay to be wrong sometimes - and when I gave the factual evidence and dates and the archives you can get these references and resources from - will that not do - instead of trying to change the subject and ignore the points and facts I stated?
> Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2008 07:30:32 -0500> From: markalause at gmail.com> Subject: Re: [Marxism] Seymour/Ayers> To: causecollector at msn.com> > I suspect that Louis was talking about the SDS's activities in an> antiwar movement, but the real problem here seems to be the> imprecision in discussing the SDS. I don't see how anyone this side> of Wikipedia or something can fail to understand the absolute> necessity of distinguishing between the SDS before 1969 and what it> became afterwards.> > This is because, even on the most superficial level....> > * the turnover implicit in a genuinely student-based group meant that> the organization had little continuity of personnel> > * the splits blasted away the base of the organization and created new> leaderships that weren't there. (I mean this on every level...and from> any angle...the personnel, structures, functions of SDS leadership> after 1969 was unprecedented in the SDS's early history.)> > * the splits changed what was left of the organization in terms of its> ideology and its adoption of a hard doctrinal approach to politics.> > SDS after 1969 had different members, different leaders and different> ideas than the SDS before 1969. For this reason, confounding the SDS> before 1969 with the SDS after 1969 is almost as imprecise and as> pointless as confusing the Socialist Workers Party with the Socialist> Labor Party.> > ML> > ________________________________________________> YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.> Send list submissions to: Marxism at lists.econ.utah.edu> Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/causecollector%40msn.com
More information about the Marxism