Jim replies.
>
>Silly? How so? I said that the bombings would provide an opportunity for
>the government to cast itself as the protector of the immigrant
>communities and cover up its record of racism. That is exactly what
>happened. And I said that the relative decline of the far right led them
>to plant bombs, and that is what happened. I take no pleasure in saying,
>I told you so.
Empirical bullshit Jim. Taking this stuff and shuffling it for your own opportunist
appetites does not change the fact that fascism and the system that generates it has
been disappeared as you claim. I said to you that the anti immigrant stuff that Blair
is the expedition government for his *own* bourgeoisie and the fascist bombs
complement each other. Both are attacks by the same class on the immigrant
communities. Both are a possible future for immigrants as a final bourgeois solution
to the immigrant problem. Against this we must argue a communist perspective of
mobilizing the massive organizations of the workers to become the defenders of all of
the oppressed both against the Blairs of the world and the fascists.
>
>Incidentally, I take your comments on LM as a compliment - both of them.
>I hope that we do cause mischief in the cause of liberty. What's your
>alternative? Obedient authoritarianism?
Oh you mischievous little boy you!
>The reports are mistaken. The police welcomed the involvement of
>immigrant communities, and co-operated with the Southall monitoring
>project's Suresh Grover.
Are you saying that the cops support militias in the immigrant communities?
>>
>>As a matter of fact Jim wants to insist like the bourgeois press of the "lone
>>ranger" aspect of this. More sleeping pills for poor and working class people!
>>Rather then pointing out that fascism in the anti immigrant racist form it
>>presents itself these days is a deadly threat to poor and working class people!
>
>I don't insist anything, but I am not ruling out the likelihood that the
>bomber was indeed acting alone, as you seem to be. Let's wait and see
>what the evidence is before we make up our minds.
What has this got to do with anything? The incidents are hardly of the lone ranger
character but connected to late capitalist society. The fascists waiting in the wings
are the instrument to be used when the bourgeoisie no longer can control the situation
with the Blairs of the world. And Blair can become quite unuseful quickly in that he
has taken the leadership of the LP over the rubicon of being a party which can control
the workers as a bourgeois workers party.My guess is that a deep split in Labor is
quite viable in the not to distant future.
>
>You consider it to be a wake up call to tell people about the threat of
>fascism. But Tony Blair says exactly the same thing in his speech to
>Sikhs two nights ago. The bombings mean we must all be vigilant says the
>prime minister adding that the bombings are the equivalent of Serbia's
>ethnic cleansing policy [!].
Yeah but Blair wants them to believe in the capitalist state and its institutions like
the cops. But we say that only the working class mobilized and armed to the teeth can
really defend all of the oppressed. Quite a difference there now Jim ain't it?
>
>It is you who are putting the people to sleep by distracting them from
>the real and present danger posed by the police, the government and the
>asylum bill. Instead of attacking these dangers you say that we should
>all join in Tony Blair's crusade against 'ethnic cleansing' and line up
>behind the police and the home secretary.
Bullshit Jim. You are the ones that are saying fascism is no danger it is the
Blairite. We say both are a real danger!
>
>You know who is paying me. The Times paid me for the article I
>submitted. I am not ashamed of earning a living. And you are right, I
>write what I believe. But it is you who have deviated from a Marxist
>analysis in favor of a popular front with Blair.
Yeah I know why ya do it Jim. Journalists need to make a living. But to make the big
time they unfortunately must sell their souls and capitulate politically--at least
some of them. And that is what we are discussing--that is who is "deviating" from
Marxism..
>
>>PPS...Jim, Um even if this incident were to be proven to be a "lone ranger"
>>incident you are wrong.
>
>That's what's called backing all the horses.
No it is not. It is just a statement of reality. Fascism complements the bourgeois
order. And if the bourgeoisie can not implement its program for immigrants and
minority groups with the likes of Tony Blair to administrate it they will let the
fascists out of the closet to do the job.
By the way the cute way you defended merry little old England and its culture against
uniforms and Nazis and all that is a step away from claiming that fascism can not
raise its ugly face in England. Wanna bet? But it don't have to be swastikas and
uniforms. But just might be British officers, lumpen and a crazed petty bourgeoisie
who see England being over run by minorities that do the job...
Naturally this is connected to the economic stuff and a world crisis for capitalism.
Which I see is now once again on the edge of this discussion coming up to the surface
by Doug among others. What our economists must answer is not the day to day
fluxuations on the market and yearly predicted BNP and all this. But if there is room
under the present order of things for capitalism to peacefully overcome its
contradictions and the shrinking world market which 5 decades of peace since the last
war gave us. If this is the case then Kautsky was right and Lenin wrong. Myself I
gravely question that Kautsky and his version is right.
Warm Regards
Bob
--- from list [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---
