Re: [Marxism] Bernie's last dance with the Dems
POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. * Referring to the US economic blockade of Venezuela, John Reimann says: "of course I oppose it". But he does not seem to give the task of opposing the blockade a high priority. Denouncing Maduro seems more important. It is essential to educate the US working class about the crimes of US imperialism around the world. Waging economic war against Venezuela one of those crimes. I disagree with John's assertion that "the economic collapse started well before the US blockade". It is true that there have been serious economic problems in Venezuela for a number of years, partly due to the government's mistakes. But these problems became much more severe as the US economic warfare against Venezuela intensified. The inability to obtain spare parts for equipment used in a wide range of industries including oil, road transport and fishing would have created severe problems for any government, no matter how competent. Cuba had the Soviet Union to help it survive the US economic blockade during its first 3 decades. Putin's Russia is not an adequate substitute. Opposing the economic warfare of the US against the Cuban and Venezuelan revolutions is a crucial task for the US left. Has Bernie Sanders said anything about the blockade of Venezuela? Or the blockade of Cuba? Chris Slee From: Marxism on behalf of John Reimann via Marxism Sent: Monday, 3 February 2020 1:21:09 PM To: Chris Slee Subject: Re: [Marxism] Bernie's last dance with the Dems POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. * As far as the NYT article and Maduro: In the first place, the economic collapse started well before the US blockade. In the second place, the article shows the luxurious lifestyle of the Bolibourgeoisie that is encouraged by the economic policies of Maduro. Of course, it only shows part of those policies, not the wage cuts that Maduro is responsible for. True, the article doesn't show Maduro for the authoritarian that he is, but when you have such luxury amidst massive poverty, and when you have massive government corruption as well as economic policies that help drive both the poverty as well as the wealth of the bolibourgeoisie, you would have to have authoritarianism. As far as opposing the US blockade - of course I oppose it, but my comment was in response to what Kavanagh wrote, and his view is the common one on the left - blind support for Maduro. We should contrast that approach to that of Trotsky, who always opposed capitalist intervention into the Soviet Union but didn't allow that opposition to stop him for one moment in condemning the Stalinist bureaucracy. Unfortunately, all too much of the left has abandoned that approach, and capitalism has not even been overthrown in Venezuela! Instead, what we see is a repetition of the approach of the supporters of Stalin - blind denial of what is really happening in Venezuela. John Reimann _ Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm Set your options at: https://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] Bernie's last dance with the Dems
POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. * As far as the NYT article and Maduro: In the first place, the economic collapse started well before the US blockade. In the second place, the article shows the luxurious lifestyle of the Bolibourgeoisie that is encouraged by the economic policies of Maduro. Of course, it only shows part of those policies, not the wage cuts that Maduro is responsible for. True, the article doesn't show Maduro for the authoritarian that he is, but when you have such luxury amidst massive poverty, and when you have massive government corruption as well as economic policies that help drive both the poverty as well as the wealth of the bolibourgeoisie, you would have to have authoritarianism. As far as opposing the US blockade - of course I oppose it, but my comment was in response to what Kavanagh wrote, and his view is the common one on the left - blind support for Maduro. We should contrast that approach to that of Trotsky, who always opposed capitalist intervention into the Soviet Union but didn't allow that opposition to stop him for one moment in condemning the Stalinist bureaucracy. Unfortunately, all too much of the left has abandoned that approach, and capitalism has not even been overthrown in Venezuela! Instead, what we see is a repetition of the approach of the supporters of Stalin - blind denial of what is really happening in Venezuela. John Reimann On Sun, Feb 2, 2020 at 3:59 PM Chris Slee wrote: > The New York Times article does not show that Maduro is a dictator. What > it shows is that the ruthless US economic blockade has been effective. It > has forced Maduro to make concessions to the capitalist class. > > Whether it has totally destroyed the revolution is less clear. For a > different view, see: > > > https://www.counterpunch.org/2020/01/29/venezuela-january-2020-hardship-and-resistance/ > > > For socialists in the US and its allies such as Australia, our main > emphasis should be on opposing the blockade rather than denouncing Maduro. > > Chris Slee > > > -- > *From:* Marxism on behalf of John > Reimann via Marxism > *Sent:* Monday, 3 February 2020 6:42 AM > *To:* Chris Slee > *Subject:* Re: [Marxism] Bernie's last dance with the Dems > > POSTING RULES & NOTES > #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. > #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. > #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. > * > > Just because somebody says something doesn't make it so. > > Sanders is denounced for calling Maduro a dictator? Well, yes, he actually > is a dictator and who is benefiting from it is made clear in this NYT > article that I've been trying to post. (I'm guessing it's too long.) > > > https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/01/world/americas/Venezuela-economy-dollars.html?fbclid=IwAR2ci-gIEQ9gmhqaaHmMW2gVni8UL-TFOgs4gNKCh9xgweF9bT-8WJ9ejBk > It's the bolibourgeoisie, which is living it up now that dollars are > allowed to be repatriated and the Venezuelan economy has been officially > dolarized. > > The "phony Russiagate narrative"? Yes, Russia/Putin did actually intervene > in the 2016 elections. Did their intervention cause the Democrats to lose? > Of course not in and of itself, but according to the book "House of Trump > House of Putin" it influenced something like 3% of the vote - possibly > enough to swing the vote in several key states. > > The author writes: "Similar principled differences can be seen in programs > like free tuition, and cancellation of medical and student debt." > Differences over a reform program doesn't make those principled just > because Kavanagh says they are. > > Sanders a "social democrat"? Social democracy developed as a wing of the > working class movement. For all its faults and outright betrayals, at least > it is based on the working class having its own party. In contrast, there > is a wing of capitalist politics that advocates granting some reforms to > the working class in order to help contain the class conflict. That wing > was known as "liberalism", a term that came under disfavor in the late '70s > and rebranded itself as "progressive". Since the collapse of the Soviet > Union and Stalinism, it's now being rebranded as "democratic socialist". > Just because Sanders calls himself a democr
Re: [Marxism] Bernie's last dance with the Dems
POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. * The New York Times article does not show that Maduro is a dictator. What it shows is that the ruthless US economic blockade has been effective. It has forced Maduro to make concessions to the capitalist class. Whether it has totally destroyed the revolution is less clear. For a different view, see: https://www.counterpunch.org/2020/01/29/venezuela-january-2020-hardship-and-resistance/ For socialists in the US and its allies such as Australia, our main emphasis should be on opposing the blockade rather than denouncing Maduro. Chris Slee From: Marxism on behalf of John Reimann via Marxism Sent: Monday, 3 February 2020 6:42 AM To: Chris Slee Subject: Re: [Marxism] Bernie's last dance with the Dems POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. * Just because somebody says something doesn't make it so. Sanders is denounced for calling Maduro a dictator? Well, yes, he actually is a dictator and who is benefiting from it is made clear in this NYT article that I've been trying to post. (I'm guessing it's too long.) https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/01/world/americas/Venezuela-economy-dollars.html?fbclid=IwAR2ci-gIEQ9gmhqaaHmMW2gVni8UL-TFOgs4gNKCh9xgweF9bT-8WJ9ejBk It's the bolibourgeoisie, which is living it up now that dollars are allowed to be repatriated and the Venezuelan economy has been officially dolarized. The "phony Russiagate narrative"? Yes, Russia/Putin did actually intervene in the 2016 elections. Did their intervention cause the Democrats to lose? Of course not in and of itself, but according to the book "House of Trump House of Putin" it influenced something like 3% of the vote - possibly enough to swing the vote in several key states. The author writes: "Similar principled differences can be seen in programs like free tuition, and cancellation of medical and student debt." Differences over a reform program doesn't make those principled just because Kavanagh says they are. Sanders a "social democrat"? Social democracy developed as a wing of the working class movement. For all its faults and outright betrayals, at least it is based on the working class having its own party. In contrast, there is a wing of capitalist politics that advocates granting some reforms to the working class in order to help contain the class conflict. That wing was known as "liberalism", a term that came under disfavor in the late '70s and rebranded itself as "progressive". Since the collapse of the Soviet Union and Stalinism, it's now being rebranded as "democratic socialist". Just because Sanders calls himself a democratic socialist doesn't make him a socialist of any sort. Nor does Kavanagh's repeating the claim make it so. I looked up some of Kavanagh's other scribblings, such as one which calls Soleimani a "respected general". Kavanagh should try asking the Syrians about that one. He also seems to have few criticisms of this century's worst tyrant - Assad. Oh, yes, and one last thing: Calling somebody by their first name normally implies having some sort of personal connection with them. Sanders lives in part off of his kindly old uncle image, of which being known as "Bernie" is an important part. But just because Kavanagh falls into that lingo doesn't make it so. My guess is that he's never met Sanders, never will meet him, and Sanders won't be over at Kavanagh's table for this year's Thanksgiving family dinner. John Reimann -- *“In politics, abstract terms conceal treachery.” *from "The Black Jacobins" by C. L. R. James Check out:https:http://oaklandsocialist.com also on Facebook _ Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm Set your options at: https://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/chris_w_slee%40hotmail.com _ Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm Set your options at: https://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] Bernie's last dance with the Dems
POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. * Just because somebody says something doesn't make it so. Sanders is denounced for calling Maduro a dictator? Well, yes, he actually is a dictator and who is benefiting from it is made clear in this NYT article that I've been trying to post. (I'm guessing it's too long.) https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/01/world/americas/Venezuela-economy-dollars.html?fbclid=IwAR2ci-gIEQ9gmhqaaHmMW2gVni8UL-TFOgs4gNKCh9xgweF9bT-8WJ9ejBk It's the bolibourgeoisie, which is living it up now that dollars are allowed to be repatriated and the Venezuelan economy has been officially dolarized. The "phony Russiagate narrative"? Yes, Russia/Putin did actually intervene in the 2016 elections. Did their intervention cause the Democrats to lose? Of course not in and of itself, but according to the book "House of Trump House of Putin" it influenced something like 3% of the vote - possibly enough to swing the vote in several key states. The author writes: "Similar principled differences can be seen in programs like free tuition, and cancellation of medical and student debt." Differences over a reform program doesn't make those principled just because Kavanagh says they are. Sanders a "social democrat"? Social democracy developed as a wing of the working class movement. For all its faults and outright betrayals, at least it is based on the working class having its own party. In contrast, there is a wing of capitalist politics that advocates granting some reforms to the working class in order to help contain the class conflict. That wing was known as "liberalism", a term that came under disfavor in the late '70s and rebranded itself as "progressive". Since the collapse of the Soviet Union and Stalinism, it's now being rebranded as "democratic socialist". Just because Sanders calls himself a democratic socialist doesn't make him a socialist of any sort. Nor does Kavanagh's repeating the claim make it so. I looked up some of Kavanagh's other scribblings, such as one which calls Soleimani a "respected general". Kavanagh should try asking the Syrians about that one. He also seems to have few criticisms of this century's worst tyrant - Assad. Oh, yes, and one last thing: Calling somebody by their first name normally implies having some sort of personal connection with them. Sanders lives in part off of his kindly old uncle image, of which being known as "Bernie" is an important part. But just because Kavanagh falls into that lingo doesn't make it so. My guess is that he's never met Sanders, never will meet him, and Sanders won't be over at Kavanagh's table for this year's Thanksgiving family dinner. John Reimann -- *“In politics, abstract terms conceal treachery.” *from "The Black Jacobins" by C. L. R. James Check out:https:http://oaklandsocialist.com also on Facebook _ Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm Set your options at: https://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
