[L-I] unsuscribe

2001-01-13 Thread Julio FernándezBaraibar




___
Leninist-International mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international



[L-I] my participation on L-I

2001-01-13 Thread Mark Jones

Mac has subbed me here *involuntarily*. This seems to be a change in Mac's previous
policy of making a virtue out of the crassly petit-bourgeois individualistic method
of letting people decide for themselves. As a good proletarian Soldier Schweik of
our movement, I am of course happy to go where I'm sent (within reason).

His reasons, as supplied to me are, (a) The ends justify the means, and (b) there
has to be at least one list where you, Louis and Yoshie all co-exist.

I am not sure about co-existing with Yoshie, since she has moved dramatically to the
right, on the evidence of postings I have seen of hers to counter-revolutionary fora
such as LBO and Pen-l, and what's more she shows clear signs of pomposity. However,
I'm prepared to make a go of it despite that.

As far as L-I is concerned, I have to honestly say that I am not as proud to be
associated with it as I once was, and I frankly think that the present team of
moderators (Yoshie Furuhashi (from Japan), Macdonald Stainsby (Canada) and Mine
Aysen Doyran
(Turkey) ) have made a hash of things. The list seems to have no direction at all
and there is a good deal of hopeless sectarianism and idiotic flaming. This has got
to stop. In order to avoid all tincture of sectarianism, and to simplify things for
me, from now on I will let you know what to think and you will all agree. Clear?

Second, all flaming is to be rationalised as follows: the only permissible flames
are those which satisfy the concordance of the Medieval Insult Generator. The url
for this is:
http://www.win.bright.net/%7Eblbeast/medieval/insults.html

Finally, if L-I is to continue at all (I see little point in this List at present)
it ought to do what it was set up to do, ie, debate revolutionary theory. There
ought to be a whole let less flim-flam, crossposting, idiotic news items of the
'from the frontlines' type, and a whole lot less Talin-Srotsky baggage.

I hope that's all clear enough.

Mark Jones


___
Leninist-International mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international



[L-I] Re: my participation on L-I

2001-01-13 Thread Yoshie Furuhashi

Finally, if L-I is to continue at all (I see little point in this 
List at present)
it ought to do what it was set up to do, ie, debate revolutionary theory.

Fire away.

Yoshie

___
Leninist-International mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international



[L-I] 2 sentences from .....

2001-01-13 Thread SMye5

In a message dated 13/01/01 09:54:22 GMT Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

   from a self-declared and unashamed centrist, but one who desperately 
 wants
to break out of this morass -
- Steve Myers.
  
  Steve, I think it'll be much better for all concerned if you stay right 
 where you
  are.
  
  Mark

- - - - - - - - - - - - 

In a message dated 13/01/01 09:39:22 GMT Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 The list seems to have no direction at all
  and there is a good deal of hopeless sectarianism and idiotic flaming. 
This 
 has got to stop.

Question: By juxtaposing these two sentences from Mark, written within 
minutes of each other, am I proving my own centrist sectarianism and cheap 
point scoring? Which is going to then set off another round of short 
egotisitic quips. Whoever invented Marxist E-lists? Probably the God of Sect 
from Pebo-land.
SM

___
Leninist-International mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international



[L-I] Program, Organization, Conjuncture

2001-01-13 Thread Yoshie Furuhashi

Effacing distinctions in a manner which preserves the 
*revolutionary* nature of the
organisation entails submerging pre-existing differences of outlook, 
social origin,
location within the division of labour etc, within an *agreed 
programme* under the
sign of an *agreed theorisation of the conjuncture*. I see no reason 
to suppose, to
judge from her other writings, that such a process of assimilation into a
revolutionary organisation/process, forms any part of Yoshie's 
agenda, private or
public.

Mark

A revolutionary organization with a clear program has yet to come 
into being in my corner of the planet.  What of yours?  In the 
absence of a revolutionary party active within a mass movement, into 
what should one assimilate?  We have to build it, first of all.

Now, why don't you lay out your analysis of the present conjuncture, 
now that you are here?  That should be a good point of departure.

Yoshie

___
Leninist-International mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international



Re: [L-I] unsuscribe

2001-01-13 Thread Julio FernándezBaraibar

Dear and admired comrade Mark:
Life is not so easy here.
I don't have phone line for the last three months, because the fucking
spanish company wants me to pay them a $ 500 bill, which I have not.
Due to this situation, I am forced to receive my emails at the house of
different friends. Of course, this is very annoying, as everybody can
understand.
Anyway I am solving my temporary lack of cash, because some Gods have
remembered me and I begun to work in the official radio station of the
Buenos Aires City.  That means that soon I will get enough resources to fix
this financial disagreement between me and the antique colonial power.
Dear Mark and everybody else: My retirement of the list is not only, but
VERY TEMPORARY, in order not to bother my tolerant friends.
In a few weeks, my argentinian voice will be back with a fistfull of truths.
Greetings in the millenium of the socialist revolution.
Julio FB


___
Leninist-International mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international



RE: [L-I] unsuscribe

2001-01-13 Thread Mark Jones

thanks for being with us, I've put your crashlist sub on hold

best wishes

Mark
venceremos!

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
 Julio FernandezBaraibar
 Sent: 13 January 2001 11:47
 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject: Re: [L-I] unsuscribe


 Dear and admired comrade Mark:
 Life is not so easy here.
 I don't have phone line for the last three months, because the fucking
 spanish company wants me to pay them a $ 500 bill, which I have not.
 Due to this situation, I am forced to receive my emails at the house of
 different friends. Of course, this is very annoying, as everybody can
 understand.
 Anyway I am solving my temporary lack of cash, because some Gods have
 remembered me and I begun to work in the official radio station of the
 Buenos Aires City.  That means that soon I will get enough resources to fix
 this financial disagreement between me and the antique colonial power.
 Dear Mark and everybody else: My retirement of the list is not only, but
 VERY TEMPORARY, in order not to bother my tolerant friends.
 In a few weeks, my argentinian voice will be back with a fistfull of truths.
 Greetings in the millenium of the socialist revolution.
 Julio FB


 ___
 Leninist-International mailing list
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
 http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international



___
Leninist-International mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international



RE: [L-I] Re: my participation on L-I

2001-01-13 Thread Mark Jones




 Fire away.

 Yoshie

I'm on the following lists: this, Lou's, deep-eco, wsn and the crashlist. For the
past couple of weeks I've been scanning the archives of other lists, and I haven't
felt the urge to join or participate in them. I may rejoin Rob's list or perhaps
he'll be good enough to do it for me and save me the bother, altho I would prefer
not to discuss Bhaskar unless someone can first identify for me the name of one
practising and fairly well thought of scientist in any major discipline like
physics, chemistry, biology, astronomy etc, or sub-division thereof, who even knows
of the existence of Roy Bhaskar let alone thinks him of any worth whatsoever.

That's all I'm doing right now and even that is too much. This means, as far as I
can see, that unless you contribute to l-i more it is not likely we are going to be
discussing anything much. I'm already doing more than I meant to anyway. This does
not mean that I do not like to talk with you or don't respect your mind. But I'm not
initiating anything right now, so you better unpack your own torpedos (not Russian
ones, I hope, which are designed on the uroborus principle).

Mark





___
Leninist-International mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international



RE: [L-I] Program, Organization, Conjuncture

2001-01-13 Thread Mark Jones


 A revolutionary organization with a clear program has yet to come
 into being in my corner of the planet.  What of yours?  In the
 absence of a revolutionary party active within a mass movement, into
 what should one assimilate?  We have to build it, first of all.

 Now, why don't you lay out your analysis of the present conjuncture,
 now that you are here?  That should be a good point of departure.


Ah, I see you are indeed working on the uroborus principle of circularity. You can't
build a party without a theory, and you can't have a theory without first having a
party seems to be your position. IMO what you have to do is (a) make some kind of
analysis of the global conjuncture; (b) persuade other people of it and (c) organise
around it.

If you want to know where I think (a) is at, check out the crashlist website and
archive. There is a good resume of where (a) is,  written by Stan Goff.

You have already long ago rejected my version of (a). You still think in terms of
socialist construction, social meliorism, bettering the human condition,
emancipation, more dignity for labour, worldwide social justice etc. These ideas are
completely reactionary in the circumstances, they are a brake on the *revolutionary*
movement because they do not address the nature of the historical impasse which
capitaism has now draghged humankind into; your ideas are a century out of date and
belong with the progressivism of 'storming the heavens' bolshevism and 19th century
social optimism generally. What we *ought* to do is construct people with the bitter
truth about the fate of biodiversity which exterminist capital has brought us all
to.

One of the latest and most pitiful incarnations of this idea, which attempts the
impossible squaring of eco-doom with  social progress circles (impossible even for
an uroborus) is the latest effort by Foster to ground Marxism in epicurus. In
england you can buy at harrod's an upmarket raspberry jam called Epicurus. I would
rather spend my money that way, on the whole.

Mark


___
Leninist-International mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international



FW: [L-I] Program, Organization, Conjuncture

2001-01-13 Thread Mark Jones



-Original Message-
From: Mark Jones [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 13 January 2001 12:37
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [L-I] Program, Organization, Conjuncture

[[typos corrected]

 A revolutionary organization with a clear program has yet to come
 into being in my corner of the planet.  What of yours?  In the
 absence of a revolutionary party active within a mass movement, into
 what should one assimilate?  We have to build it, first of all.

 Now, why don't you lay out your analysis of the present conjuncture,
 now that you are here?  That should be a good point of departure.


Ah, I see you are indeed working on the uroborus principle of circularity. You can't
build a party without a theory, and you can't have a theory without first having a
party seems to be your position. IMO what you have to do is (a) make some kind of
analysis of the global conjuncture; (b) persuade other people of it and (c) organise
around it.

If you want to know where I think (a) is at, check out the crashlist website and
archive. There is a good resume of where (a) is,  written by Stan Goff.

You have already long ago rejected my version of (a). You still think in terms of
socialist construction, social meliorism, bettering the human condition,
emancipation, more dignity for labour, worldwide social justice etc. These ideas are
completely reactionary in the circumstances, they are a brake on the *revolutionary*
movement because they do not address the nature of the historical impasse which
capitaism has now dragged humankind into; your ideas are a century out of date and
belong with the progressivism of 'storming the heavens' bolshevism and 19th century
social optimism generally. What we *ought* to do is confront people with the bitter
truth about the fate of biodiversity which exterminist capital has brought us all
to.

One of the latest and most pitiful incarnations of this idea, which attempts the
impossible squaring of eco-doom with  social progress circles (impossible even for
an uroborus) is the latest effort by Foster to ground Marxism in epicurus. In
england you can buy at harrod's an upmarket raspberry jam called Epicurus. I would
rather spend my money that way, on the whole.

Mark


___
Leninist-International mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international



Re: [L-I] On Centrism Today.

2001-01-13 Thread Louis Proyect

Yoshie:
Lenin's criticism of Economism (socialism conflated with 
trade-unionism) still stands, and if the criticism of Economism is 
what Lou means by "centrism," a "swamp," etc., I cannot agree more. 

I am not sure what you are trying to say. If you are trying to establish
connections between Economism and centrism, then we disagree. Economism was
a current in the emerging Russian socialist movement that opposed a
nation-wide organization. It instead advocated struggles at the plant-gate
level around demands that were of immediate interest to the working class.
It was an obstacle to the consolidation of a nation-wide Marxist movement.
Centrism, by and large, refers to a current *within* Marxism that emerged
after 1917 and which occupies a space between the Second International and
the Third International. Forces opposed to the creation of a Third
International, such as the French Socialist Party and the German
Independent Socialist Party, are classic "centrists". Although these types
of parties existed throughout the 20s and 30s (they are virtually extinct
today in the advanced capitalist countries but occasionally crop up in the
third world--the MIR in Allende's Chile might be called a centrist type
formation),  there was little to distinguish them ideologically from
Marxism broadly defined. Economism came to an end at the famous split
conference that generated the "What is to be Done" pamphlet. The closest
one comes to such a phenomenon today is autonomist Marxism, which makes a
fetish of local organizing and eschews challenging the state on a national
level.

Louis Proyect
Marxism mailing list: http://www.marxmail.org/

___
Leninist-International mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international



[L-I] Re: Lunatics Liberation Front

2001-01-13 Thread Tony Abdo

Having accomplished 3 out of 4 of lunacies top honors (psych patent,
Trotskyist **though not Spart**, and  psych nurse), I am always
interested in 'lay' comments about what constitutes craziness.

Macdonald, it goes without saying that it is not 'smart' to enter the ER
of a hospital to talk about what the 'voices' are saying. You CAN do
this in a church if you label the 'voices'  as being angels.But do
not call them demons, please. Or mention that they are connected
with the mass communications systems or home entertainment center.

A socially acceptable way (though expensive) of discussing 'voices' is
to call a psychic hotline 900 number. There, you will find a
sympathetic counsellor. Another thing to do is to simply put the
'voices' comments to paper and rhyme, or to compose lyrics to a rock
song.

The difficulty in constructing a Lunatics Liberation Front falls to the
reality that lunatics are never taken very seriously.Lunatics are
rarely either serious are efficient people, while we live in a very
SERIOUS world. Unless they are angry lunatics,  when at time they
can become extremely intense individuals, though still usually
inefficient.

The major barrier between the lunatic and the sane is this lack of
efficiency.  A lunatic who becomes efficient is no longer a lunatic,
no matter how seemingly insane. At this point, the individual might
actually become CEO, church, or Trotskyist leadership material.If
they study hard, there are even academic positions available so that
they may instruct others, or merely continue their own studies.

The arch enemy of lunacy was Calvin (as in Calvin and Hobbes). Your
work supervisor may very well be a Calvinist, since this is the perfect
residence for the sane-- the supervisory post.  Those with mental
problems and defects will usually be doing the hard work, though not
very efficiently. This causes constant tension.

Macdonald, I can definitely imagine the medieval quality of the BC
'mental health system'.Here in Texas, we try to model ourselves more
on the Mexican system as opposed to the Canadian. We have had some
impressive results.

What does the future hold for the lunatic? This is surely the
question on most humanist minds.  With certfied Texas lunatics now
holding high federal positions, the future looks good for lunacy.

In fact, just the state of Texas alone has many holding cells of lunacy
just waiting to be released.  This should become fertile ground for
the spread of new focos for the Lunatics Liberation Front.

In Solidarity,
Tony
+++

Macdonald wrote...
having both several friends and family members who have been "troubled"
and seeing what happens when people who have mental troubles get
subjected to "help" from the capitalist state, I found this highly worth
a visit. The "do's and don'ts" were high on my list of things that I had
heard (specifically the voices- if you tell someone you are interested
in these voices and want to know what they say, watch the sigh of
relief. Word of advice to people: if you have trouble and feel you need
help from a "professional" mental care worker, DO NOT tell them about
the voices. Once you do that, you might as well say good-bye to the
outside world. 

The Mental Health system here in BC is positively medieval..










___
Leninist-International mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international



[L-I] Well, what the heck?

2001-01-13 Thread Tony Abdo

In a way, Clinton agrees with us that say it doesn't matter who we, Mr./
Ms. Average Voter, vote for in the US elections.  They'll pick who
they want. I'm glad that was cleared up.

Tony

A passing comment from Clinton: the US election was stolen
By Kate Randall
13 January 2001
WSWS

Speaking on Tuesday in Chicago, Bill Clinton made a remarkable statement
for an outgoing president. In an off-the-cuff comment during a speech to
Democratic Party supporters he acknowledged that George W. Bush and the
Republicans, with the assistance of the US Supreme Court, stole the
presidential election.

"By the time it was over," Clinton said, "our candidate had won the
popular vote, and the only way they could win the election was to stop
the voting in Florida." Speaking to reporters following the event he
added that the Democrats "ran the first presidential campaign that was
so clearly winning, a court had to stop the vote in order to change the
outcome."

Clinton's comments warranted only a 30-second clip on a few evening news
programs, and have received scant attention in the print media, because
he raised an issue that journalists and the political elite would just
as soon sweep under the rug. While Clinton may have let the truth slip
out, the actual response of the Democrats to the Republicans' political
coup has been to submit to it.

Indeed, since the Supreme Court handed the presidency to Bush the
watchwords of the Democratic Party have been bipartisanship and
reconciliation.

The record of the Clinton administration from Election Day through to
the present has been to block any fight against the Republicans'
hijacking of the presidency. Clinton remained silent throughout much of
the post-election crisis, commenting that democracy and the "rule of
law" would win out. The Clinton Justice Department also refused to
launch an investigation requested by the NAACP and other organizations
into the disenfranchisement of minority voters in Florida.

When the Supreme Court called off the vote count in Florida—handing
the presidency to Bush—Clinton was one of the first to accept the
outcome of the election as legitimate, the product of the democratic
process and the Constitution. He invited Bush to the White House to
discuss a "smooth" transition to power.
No Democratic Senator—including the newly elected Senator from New
York, Hillary Rodham Clinton—supported a motion initiated by members
of the Congressional Black Caucus objecting to the awarding of Florida's
25 electoral votes to Bush. In the spirit of bipartisanship, the
Democratic Party leadership has abandoned any challenge to the Florida
vote fraud and has no plans to protest the Bush inauguration on January
20.

The contradiction between Clinton's acknowledgment that the election was
stolen and the response of his administration only underscores the
cynicism and cowardice of the Democratic Party and its cavalier attitude
towards the basic rights of the American people. This disinterest in
fundamental rights, which were won through bitter struggle over many
generations, is likewise reflected in Clinton's failure to provide any
analysis of what is, by any definition, a crisis of immense proportions.

If it is true, as Clinton admits, that his successor is assuming office
as a result of the disenfranchisement of millions of voters, how is this
to be explained? What does this break with democratic norms indicate
about the state of bourgeois democratic institutions in the US? What are
the underlying social and class contradictions that have given rise to
this unprecedented development? What does the breakdown of democratic
procedures say about the nature of the much-vaunted prosperity for which
Clinton and Gore are eager to take credit? Does this development not
have a connection to the staggering growth of inequality which is, in
fact, the major legacy of the Clinton years? These are questions the
Democrats and liberal establishment would rather ignore.

The half-joking manner in which Clinton made his comments on the
election is indicative of the lack of seriousness that dominates the
political and media establishment. To raise these issues in such a
cynical fashion—and then draw no conclusions from them or act upon
them—reveals not only the attitude of Bill Clinton as an individual
but the entire social layer for which he and the Democratic Party speak.
This reflects the outlook not of the broad mass of working people, but
rather the most privileged layers of the middle class and sections of
the ruling class who have little if any commitment to the defense of
democratic rights.

This is not the first time the Democrats have alluded to such issues,
only to bury them. Clinton's statements in Chicago were reminiscent of
Hillary Clinton's comments at the onset of the impeachment crisis, when
she said that the campaign by the Republican right against Clinton
amounted to a "vast right-wing conspiracy." No sooner had she spoken the

Re: [L-I] my participation on L-I

2001-01-13 Thread Macdonald Stainsby





 Mac has subbed me here *involuntarily*. This seems to be a change in Mac's previous
 policy of making a virtue out of the crassly petit-bourgeois individualistic method
 of letting people decide for themselves. As a good proletarian Soldier Schweik of
 our movement, I am of course happy to go where I'm sent (within reason).

Just for you, comrade. I'm still petty-bourgeois at heart.

 As I indicated previously, I am not as pleased with this list as I was in the past
either.
However, there is hope and and a recent rededication for this list not to allow the
Stalin-Trotsky nonsense to be dominant. We *will* be unsubbing those who persist in
it. I say that publicly because it bears repeating.

Macdonald Stainsby,
co-Moderator
Leninist-International list.


___
Leninist-International mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international



[L-I] A POEM-RECIPE FOR MISSILE PIE

2001-01-13 Thread MarxistMark

HOPE YOU LIKE IT

 one ton of anger for making us believe
 that life would be grander for all of us in need

 one rotten egg as you changed the shade of red
 to a darker shade of blue saying labour is now new

 a multitude of flour in your face,since youve gained power
 - which seems to be your aim-; take control for selfish gain

 custard in your eye since you let so many die
 with your revised n.h.s which really is a mess

 salt water in a beaker from each assylum seeker
 who really trusted you to give refuge,so said you

 a pie in the sky for your words are one big lie
 and see through sugar paper we have sussed out your caper



 LADY P BRISTOL   FEB 2000 

___
Leninist-International mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international



[L-I] Re: Lunatics Liberation Front

2001-01-13 Thread Tony Abdo

Carrol wrote
I don't think mental illness is funny, and I do not like, even in
humor, to be placed in the same category with the president-elect.

Carrol, I don't recall even mentioning your name once in my post. In
fact, I included only myself as having been a 'mental patient'.  You
seem rather functional (sane), though utterly lacking in humor at times.
PLUS, Baby Bush is not a 'lunatic'. 

The main thrust of my post was to state the difference between
functionality/ and disfunctionality as being the lines that capitalist
society most often defines sanity/ mental illness .You chose not to
address this at all. Instead...

Illinois is probably somewhat better than Texas (and the whole mental
illness industry is probably in many ways corrupt), nevertheless the
best opportunity a person hearing voices has of ever living a minimally
decent life *is* to report those voices to some medical agent and hope.

You state this as utter fact, yet many might  disagree with this 'hope'
you hold out. This might well be the road to ECT sessions or being
jailed in dysfunctional institutes, which you contrast as being
preferible to freedom.It might be the path to permanent nerve damage
from psychotropic drugs used to control behaviors.

Let me state that I completely agree with you that actually 'hearing
voices' is a terrible condition to experience. Nevertheless, my
humor was directed at the gullibility of the counselling/ judicial
bureaucracy that will wisk you away on a dime if it is even so much as
suggested that.. voices are to be heard.Yes, two doctors say it
is so and off you go.Make that one doctor, Macdonald.

Moreover, due to the unholy alliance in the US between romantic idiots
who think schizophrenia is somehow a mystical experience and neoliberals
wanting to cut down social expenses mental patients have simply been
dumped out onto the streets. I know several in that condition, and it is
simply horrible, _for them_.

Carrol, is it really this unholy alliance that did this horrible crime?
I rather thought that reactionary pigs were directing these
'ocurrances'. Institutionalizing or street life? Surely there is
another alternative?

I hope that the form of my reply has been less 'distasteful'? This
is a serious topic and I welcome a serious discussion about it with you.
If we talk about it further, we should not confine ourselves to only
those that have problems with 'voices'.In reality, many more that
come in contact with the 'mental health business' now come by way of
counselling, prisons, Down's Syndome, or behavioral 'problems'.Or by
way of Dr. Laura.

Tony










___
Leninist-International mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international



Re: [L-I] Re: Lunatics Liberation Front

2001-01-13 Thread Carrol Cox



Tony Abdo wrote:

 Carrol, I don't recall even mentioning your name once in my post. In
 fact, I included only myself as having been a 'mental patient'.  You
 seem rather functional (sane), though utterly lacking in humor at times.
 PLUS, Baby Bush is not a 'lunatic'.

I just wanted to get this topic (perhaps debate) situated -- and while
humor has its place in the development of any topic, it can be misleading
as a statement of what the topic is. I will respond later (and in a
different tone) to the present post, but for the moment my attention is
elsewhere.

I've suffered for about 55 years (the first 40 not diagnosed) from
intermittently severe clinical depression -- hence my including myself
among those named in your original post. I am a member and
officer of the local Depressive  Manic Depressive Support
Group, hence my fairly wide acquaintance with others suffering
from various mental illnesses.

My functionality has varied over the years. From early 1998 through
mid-October of last year, for example,  I was rarely able to do
any systematic reading of anything much longer than a short e-mail
post. I read only two complete books of any complexity during that
30 months, and can only remember much of one of them.

Carrol



___
Leninist-International mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international



Re: [L-I] Re: Lunatics Liberation Front

2001-01-13 Thread Carrol Cox



Louis Proyect wrote:


 Then why do you get into such fierce debates over topics which require that
 you familiarize yourself with lengthy texts?

I won't follow this up in any detail, but I'll give a general answer, in two
parts.

1. Preliminary: Since then I have read a number of those texts (By Blaut 
Brenner in particular). Also I had in the past read quite a bit of medieval
European history and of Chinese History. But as I repeatedly tried to tell
you, none of this reading was (or is) relevant to the point *I* was arguing.

2. I had read and re-read the relevant texts to what I was arguing: *Capital*,
*Grundrisse*, *Poverty of Philosophy*. I wasn't arguing one way or another
about the importance of imperialism to capitalism: I simply take it for granted

that imperialism is the mode of existence of capitalism, that to argue whether
or not imperialism is important to capitalism is like arguing over whether
nerves are important to the brain.

My concern was the nature of capitalism. What capitalism _is_. And all the
stuff you wanted me to read (including Blaut's writings) simply had no
relevance
to that question.  I'm currently re-reading the *Grundrisse* and Ollman's
*Alienation*. Both are relevant to the question(s) I'm interested in. As far
as I could tell -- I'll come back to this again but not right away -- you and
Jim Blaut both had a non-marxist understanding of what capitalism was/is,
what its core dynamic is/was.

That does *not* mean you and Jim were not marxists and communists. There
is in practice always a considerable gap between theory and practice. Jim's
utter commitment to the Puerto Rican Revolution was the core of his work --
and that showed through magnificently despite his positivist (and *anti*-
marxist) belief expressed in a post a couple years ago that we needed
to study relations only because we did not have all the facts. But in fact
relations *are* the facts. An isolated fact, or a huge pile of facts, are
simply nothing until their internal relations are grasped. But clearly one can
devote a whole lifetime of effectively working for the revolution even with
a positivist or pragmatic theory, just as there have been those who really
grasped the core of marxism and never acted on that recognition.

I miss Jim greatly. But he didn't really understand marxism.

Carrol

 Why did you get in such
 pissing contests with me over the Brenner thesis when my contributions to
 the discussion numbered over 25 pages? Should I have tried to make my
 points in a short e-mail? What a god-damned waste of time. I should have
 filtered out your crotchety attempts to read me out of the Marxist
 movement, whose boundaries seemed defined by Ellen Meiksins Wood and
 Chairman Mao.

 Louis Proyect
 Marxism mailing list: http://www.marxmail.org/

 ___
 Leninist-International mailing list
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
 http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international


___
Leninist-International mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international



Re: [L-I] Re: Lunatics Liberation Front

2001-01-13 Thread Mine Aysen Doyran



Louis Proyect dijo:

 Carrol Cox:
 My concern was the nature of capitalism. What capitalism _is_. And all the
 stuff you wanted me to read (including Blaut's writings) simply had no
 relevance
 to that question.

 Hopeless.

 Louis Proyect
 Marxism mailing list: http://www.marxmail.org/



I would say the same, but you were quicker than me...

Cox continued:

Jim's
utter commitment to the Puerto Rican Revolution was the core of his work  and
that showed through magnificently despite his positivist (and *anti*-
marxist) belief expressed in a post a couple years ago



--
Mine Aysen Doyran
PhD Student
Department of Political Science
SUNY at Albany
Nelson A. Rockefeller College
135 Western Ave.; Milne 102
Albany, NY 1




Shop online without a credit card
http://www.rocketcash.com
RocketCash, a NetZero subsidiary

___
Leninist-International mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international



[L-I] Forwarded from Jim Farmelant

2001-01-13 Thread Macdonald Stainsby

FRANTZ FANON was born in Martinique and educated in France, where he
became a psychiatrist. In 1953, he went to work in Algeria and soon sided with the
nationalists engaged in armed resistance against the French. Through his
psychiatric work, Fanon was one of the few people other than victims or
perpetrators who knew the full extent of the French army's use of torture
against those fighting for an independent Algeria.

Shortly before he died, Fanon wrote _Les Damns de la Terre_(The
Wretched of the Earth, 1961), the book he is best remembered for, although its very
notoriety overshadows his other work. A sort of non-Marxist bible of the
oppressed, it was seized on by mid-century radicals in the third world as

justifying violence not only for national independence but as a response
to racism and poverty. The Fanon who is likelier to interest today's readers
is the doctor who saw at first hand how humiliation and prejudice can affect
people on both sides of the colour barrier and who struggled to understand the
pathology of ethnic hatred.

Fanon never thought of himself as black until he arrived in France, where
he found himself stereotyped midway between the tirailleurs sngalais, who
were trained to frighten civilian populations, and the fez-wearing black face
that grinned at children from cocoa packets of Banania. The shock was a
lasting one. As Fanon lay dying from leukaemia, he had a nightmare of being put
through a washing-machine and de-negrified. Blackness, he wrote, does not exist as
such. It is something one discovers in another's gaze.

David Macey's life of Fanon provides, as background, an excellent guide
to the history of French decolonisation and the intellectual debates of post-war
France. The contrast between the abstract belief in libert, galit,
fraternit that was preached from Dunkirk to Fort-de-France and the reality of
otherness, which Fanon experienced on arriving in France to study medicine, provides
a haunting, if at times overdone, leitmotif that runs through the book, as
it did through his life. Fanon's first book, _Peau noire, masques blancs_ (Black
Skin, White Masks), which was published in 1952, is an angry young man's book, that
mingles personal experiences and psycho-social ideas. Fanon had little patience with
the cult of ngritude which Aim Csaire, also from Martinique, and Lopold Senghor,
who became president of Senegal, believed would transcend racial barriers and
rehabilitate African culture. His interest in mankind was broader. With
Franois Tosquelles, a Catalan-born psychiatrist, he experimented in social
therapy. This, and his encounter with Algerian workers in Lyons who suffered from
what he identified as the North African syndrome, a psychosomatic condition
brought on by being cut off from one's home environment, prepared him for his later
work in Algeria.

There, he worked in a hospital with white, Arab and Kabyle patients. This
reinforced his interest in the social dimension of some psychological
ailments. Psychotherapy, in his view, involved understanding the patient's way of
seeing the world, however irrational it might seem. As the violence increased in
Algeria, Fanon treated (mostly Arab) victims and (mostly French)
perpetrators of torture who appealed to him for help. He turned no one away and found
that both needed care.

Fanon died before Algeria became independent in July 1962. Its soldiers
and religious thugs have since made nonsense of his hopeful theory that
purifying violence would spend itself once independence was achieved. He seems here
to have forgotten a truer observation of his, taken directly from clinical
experience: in face of violence and humiliation, victims will turn also
on each other. It is for conclusions such as this, and for his other pioneering
work in the psychology of ethnic prejudice, that Fanon deserves to be read and
remembered.




  Copyright  1995-2001 The Economist Newspaper Group Ltd. All rights

  reserved.



---
Macdonald Stainsby

Rad-Green List: Radical anti-capitalist environmental discussion.
http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/rad-green

Leninist-International: Building bridges within Marxism in the tradition of V.I.
Lenin.
http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international





___
Leninist-International mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international