[Marxism] UKRAINE: Excuse Me Mister: How Far Is It From Simferopol To Grozny?
shmage at pipeline.com
Fri May 23 16:37:03 MDT 2014
On May 23, 2014, at 3:22 PM, Matthew Russo via Marxism wrote:
> Is ALL geopolitical analysis “obtuse geopolitical analysis”? When
> is it not “obtuse”? IOW, what
> is the place of objective geo-political and economic analysis in a
> revolutionary movement?
Marx, I recall, wrote an entire book (basically a collection of his
journalistic analyses) essentially devoted to geopolitical analysis.
It was called "The Eastern Question" and it centered on a conflict in
a small and distant place called---Crimea. If Louis, Zizek, et. al.
regard geopolitical analysis of the conflicts in the Arabic world, the
"former soviet union," and elsewhere (like East Asia) as "obtuse" they
are neglecting the fact that, absent a real proletarian political
movement, all such conflicts (even those involving masses of
declassed, lumpen, or petit-bourgeois-on-the-make elements in their
violence) are and can be nothing but geopolitical. The decisive
elements are always outside the national boundaries within which the
conflict is occurring. So what is "the place of objective geo-
political and economic analysis in a revolutionary movement?" Of
course objective analysis of anything and everything is always
central; and in a world economy totally dominated by imperial powers,
and totally lacking any significant proletarian revolutionary
movement, geopolitical and economic analysis is absolutely central.
But to ask that question in terms of a "revolutionary movement" is to
ignore the central fact that no such movement exists, nor can exist
until the proletariat at least *begins* to re-enter the stage of
history as a class "für sich."
This cosmos did none of gods or men make, but it
always was and is and shall be: an everlasting fire,
kindling in measures and going out in measures.
Herakleitos of Ephesos
More information about the Marxism