[PEN-L:3255] Re: Re: Re: Back to the land

[Rosser Jr, John Barkley]

     Uh oh.  I never thought that I would say that we would 
need that Sendero spokesman, Adolpho Olaechea on pen-l.  
But, speaking for him in his absence, I would note that 
there is a large difference between what they propose and 
what was carried out by the Khmer Rouge.  Conflating the 
two in such a manner is quite misleading.
Barkley Rosser
On Fri, 12 Feb 1999 02:50:37 +1100 rc-am 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Louis Proyect <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 
> 
> This is a gross distortion of what Marxism stands for. The Khmer
> >Rouge were not Marxists, they were a virulent strain of middle-class
> >radicalism that turned against its own social roots. They wanted to
> "purge"
> >Cambodian society and took people like Doug Henwood and forced them
> to
> >leave Pnomh Penh at the point of a gun. It was a nightmare version of
> the
> >Cultural Revolution.
> 
> absolutely the case.  so we agree.
> 
> 
> 
> >To frame this in terms of the Khmer Rouge is completely outrageous
> and stupid.
> 
> 
> but, i did not frame this as such.  it has already been framed as such
> by the khmer rouge and by shining path.  my comments go to the
> question of how exactly you would distinguish your version of 'back to
> the land' from these historical experiences of it.  that is to say,
> how exactly can you be sure that this is not simply a version of a
> middle-class radicalism turned against its roots through the longing
> for an idealised version of what 'the land' (or at least peasant
> cultures) are?
> 
> angela
> 

-- 
Rosser Jr, John Barkley
[EMAIL PROTECTED]