[Marxism] Helsinki: Was it "excellent"? Should we care?

John Reimann 1999wildcat at gmail.com
Sat Jul 21 17:32:28 MDT 2018

Mark deals with the heart of the matter, but I think he's mistaken. He
writes, "Trump still represents the mainstream of the U.S. ruling class."
Consider first the surrounding circumstantial evidence:

The mainstream of the US capitalist class had it all planned for Jeb Bush
(remember  him?) to be the next president. When that collapsed like a house
of cards, they moved to Hillary Clinton. Now look at what's happening: We
have not seen a US president attacked as Trump is for... Well, maybe not
since the pre Civil War days. Who ever heard of the former head of the CIA
calling a sitting president "treasonous"? This is only the most blunt of
the attacks that are heard every day on CNN, CBS - every channel but Fox.
What they mean, of course, is that Trump is not representing their
interests, which is what the "national interest" means.

Consider Trump's history: He's been a money launderer for the Russian
mafia/oligarchs since this criminal gang of capitalists rose to power in
that country. He's under their control.

It's hard to get our heads wrapped around this fact because it means a real
break from what we've seen, a transformation in the situation. And it has
enormous significance.

What does it mean when the mainstream of the capitalist class no longer
controls its chief representative? and bear in mind that this chief
executive is moving ever closer to one-man rule - that he's got control
over the legislative branch and near control over the judicial branch.
Bourgeois democracy is predicated on the control of the capitalist class
over its government; bonapartism is predicated on a loss of such control.
Maybe the US capitalist class mainstream will be able to regain control,
either through the Mueller investigation or starting with the November
elections. But maybe not, especially if Trump can really fraud November's

I doubt that anybody on this list thought that Trump would get anywhere
near the presidency. (Neither did Trump!) The fact that he did should make
us step back and reconsider our assumptions, including those we aren't
fully conscious of.

John Reimann

On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 1:40 PM, Mark Lause <markalause at gmail.com> wrote:

> I think the development if very important as well, though Trump still
> represents the mainstream of the U.S. ruling class.  He's not a rogue
> actor, though he plays one on TV.
> The American masters engineered the greatest polarization of wealth in all
> of human history.  We've seen.  We watched it.  We couldn't figure out and
> implement a plan to prevent it.  No matter.  Trump slapped the icing on the
> cake with his "tax reform."   I think Trump could pop out of a cake naked
> in the middle of the Oval Office and the ruling class would be just fine
> with it.  He's their fair-haired (or bewigged) boy for the present.  The
> fact that the Democrats have been dead useless as an opposition and the
> Republicans have cheered him on reflects that.
> More telling, the great American Bullshit about economic prosperity is
> pretty much accepted as real and circulated widely.
> His attempt to be of service to Russian oligarchs as well as American
> oligarchs doesn't necessarily cause problems for them.  Helsinki caused a
> brief problem, but the mere show of a walk back pretty much settled things.
> . . . for the present, at least.  We now seem to have moved on to Playboy
> models, payoffs and Cohen tapes.
> Cheers,
> Mark L.

*“In politics, abstract terms conceal treachery.” *from "The Black
Jacobins" by C. L. R. James
Check out:https:http://oaklandsocialist.com also on Facebook

More information about the Marxism mailing list