[Marxism] Your latest piece was pretty sectarian also...
lnp3 at panix.com
Wed Nov 6 14:48:56 MST 2013
On 11/6/13 4:22 PM, MARK EPSTEIN wrote:
> Hi Louis,
> I saw your latest piece in CP, and really can't quite
> make out what caused your bile.
It was likely an undigested bit of beef, a blot of mustard, a crumb of
cheese, a fragment of underdone potato.
> I really don't think the "left" (to the extent it exists, which is
> mostly only in tiny fragments) needs to choose between "linking with
> people" and countering a US global imperialist agenda.
I think the more burning question is whether the Western left should
extol the Egyptian military because it is "anti-US". I've never met a
General I liked, except for Giap of course.
> In one of your attacks against Cooke you quote a paragraph in which he
> says Rouhani is getting ready to sell off oil to the highest bidder
> (quite likely US), and I remember reading the piece and he put in the
> context of fracking allowing the worst domestic energy pigs more
> "independence" from OPEC, etc.
> In the 'counter' you wrote, you write absolutely nothing about
> oil or Cooke's allegations about Rouhani wanting to sell it, you just
> quote some very generic political analyses from those fabulous organs of
> the left (I don't think...!!) the NYT and the "Guardian". Is that the
> same "Guardian" that did everything possible to smear Assange and
> Wikileaks (slightly better but not much with Snowden...) while using
> their disclosures to the hilt?
Let me repeat my point in terms so simple that even you might understand
it. In September Cooke was predicting a war with Syria that would be act
one leading to a war with Iran. It turned out to be a false prediction
as anybody reading the NY Times closely could have told you. General
Thomas Dempsey, the most powerful American military figure, warned
Congress about a war with Syria and he was totally ignored by people
like Cooke. The batty WSWS website, as I pointed out, referred to
Dempsey but chose to interpret his words the opposite as he intended.
This sect that basically plagiarizes the bourgeois press with a coating
of Marxist rhetoric will simply not recognize the facts when the NY
Times reports them. I have a real problem with the left living in a
fantasy world. The idea that Obama deciding not to "go into Syria" has
anything to do with helicopters carrying people from the American
Embassy in South Vietnam is psychotic (no offense meant to people who
are actually ill.)
> In any case your argument against a slew of people from Cooke to Global
> Research is completely unconvincing. Global Research and others you
> mentioned, often have excellent, EMPIRICAL, information the imperialist
> rags you quote don't...
Yes, Global Research is quite trustworthy. Their article on how the
rebels were responsible for chemical gas attacks was written by one
Yossef Bodansky, who served as Director of the Congressional Task Force
on Terrorism and Unconventional Warfare of the US House of
Representatives from 1988 to 2004. Rush Limbaugh quoted this article to
his radio audience. Just our kind of peeps.
> How could you possibly think the left does too muchgeo-strategic
> thinking when since the "old left" it does hardly any at all?? And
> in any case why are geo-strategic thinking, linking up with Marxist
> analysts and people elsewhere, and thinking rationally about
> institutional aggregation and change mutually exclusive?? I don't
> get it at all.... Assad, Gheddafi or Putin hardly have to be
> saints for even someone with a modicum of common sense to see that the
> most criminal US elite ever bent on world domination by military and
> information control means in manners that will make III Reich
> totalitarianism look like an amateur's job is incredibly more dangerous,
> and has clearly been pursuing just such a course since the so-called
> "end of the Cold War"....??
I am a socialist. I have no idea what you are. If you want to make
common cause with Putin, Assad, and Qaddafi, be my guest. As Woody Allen
once put it, "the heart wants want it wants". I understand...
> Where is the so-called "peace dividend" of the largest pseudo-left
> accomodationist portion of the US "left"??
> The totalitarianism of the IV Reich (US) is precisely so much more
> dangerous because of its creeping nature and the manner in which it is
> trying to make the "there is no alternative" psychological condition of
> every alleged 'human' on the planet...
> Sorry Louis, but you really lost me on this one...! Your film
> criticism on the other hand I always find interesting and at least
> thought provoking, even when I may disagree on single aspects...
> Best, just comradely criticism, in friendship,
> Mark Epstein
My advice to you is to think less about movies and more deeply about
world politics. If you decide that you want to get past "geopolitical
chess games", try reading this:
More information about the Marxism