[Marxism] Fwd: Why are people still living in east Aleppo? - BBC News

[Louis Proyect via Marxism]

  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.
*



http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-37779478
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Voting for the lesser danger

[Mark Lause via Marxism]

  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.
*

It's the nature of the beast that this is a fruitless exercise.

The game requires judging these people based on what they say going into an
election.   This is offered with no real consideration of their past and
present records, which might provide a better indication of their
intentions.

But even those intentions tell us little about differently they might
respond to events, opportunities and challenges that come up over the next
four years.

And their responses are going to be shaped by the same massive army of
advisors, functionaries, lobbyists, pundits, etc.

ML
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Marxism] Absolutely final thoughts

[Gary MacLennan via Marxism]

  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.
*

I am actually aware that it is the height of bad manners to lecture or
argue with comrades in another country. But my excuse is that what happens
in the USA matters all around the world.

So let me make a final comment.  It is noon Tuesday here and this time
tomorrow we will know more. But first principles first.

8 years ago I was engaged in a sharp polemic with Obama supporters who said
his election would give rise to a great wave of young black activists. Well
that movement BLACK LIVES MATTER did eventually eventuate, but it had
bugger all to do with BO.

I said then, and I say it again, we need to smash the  Republican-Democrat
duopoly for there to be any substantial progress in the world. I argued
with all the power I could that in no shape or form should we buy into any
variation of the lesser of two evils rubbish.  [That for me is 'sacrosanct'
btw]. If I lived in the States I would vote Stein, if I could. Otherwise I
would abstain and loudly at that.

The little bit of wisdom I have accumulated over my 74 years, tells me that
when no one takes you seriously for being a revolutionary Leftist, it is
imperative that you take yourself seriously. And to buy into the very
ancient shell game entitled "Vote Democrat to Keep Fascism at bay" means
that we are not taking ourselves seriously.  We have learned nothing and
forgot nothing.

Harangue over

comradely

Gary
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Marxism] Voting for the lesser danger

[Ken Hiebert via Marxism]

  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.
*

In order to vote for the lesser danger, you need to establish who is the lesser 
danger.
I recall that in 2000 some Arab American organizations favoured Bush over Gore 
because he wasn't quite as effusive in his stated support for Israel.

In the article I sent yesterday, 
http://www.councilforthenationalinterest.org/new/?p=4221#.WB7a-yMrKNV the 
author clearly believes that Trump is the lesser evil.

Also, to repeat a point I have made previously, in 1964 many people rallied to 
support Johnson because they had good reason to fear that Goldwater would take 
the US into Vietnam.

   ken h
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Marxism] Fwd: Responding to Bassam Haddad’s False Binary on Syria

[Louis Proyect via Marxism]

  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.
*

In presenting this argument, Haddad apparently believes he has 
formulated a “neutral” account of the debate over Syria, which impels a 
“moderate solution” to the conflict. He offers this “moderate solution” 
in a way that, he thinks, could not but be embraced by all reasonable 
people. In fact, as Haddad implicitly threatens, a rejection of his 
proposed solution would only further entrench rigidly “maximalist” 
positions, which would ultimately aggravate the current impasse.


In truth, however, Haddad’s account is neither neutral nor “moderate.” 
Instead, his entire essay subtly sides with one narrative against 
another. Although he claims to be an objective moderator (indeed, he 
suggests his conclusions reflect those of the “majority of Syrians”), 
Haddad’s presentation reframes and polishes parts of the “external 
conspiracy” argument in a way that inevitably indicts the revolutionary 
camp.


full: http://muftah.org/responding-bassam-haddads-false-binary-syria/
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Give The People What They Want: DSA Members on 2016 and Beyond

[Tristan Sloughter via Marxism]

  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.
*

That is still a work in progress.

Part of why I joined the DSA is that I saw it as the org most likely to
take part in, and not be a hindrance on, the creation of a new party.
While I wasn't able to attend, I see events like The People's Summit as
bringing together the people and groups that would partly make up this
new party.

Maybe events like that and how the SA, ISO, DSA and others took some
part around the Sanders campaign shows it isn't too early to attempt a
plan of action for building such a party.

It is a thought I'm going to bring up. Usually it feels like everyone
(as in people in the SA, ISO, DSA, etc) thinks for now we continue on
with movement work and recruitment to our individual orgs, until we are
strong enough. But it can be hard to tell how strong the sum of the
parts is without work to first try bringing them together.

--
Tristan Sloughter
t...@crashfast.com



On Sat, Nov 5, 2016, at 02:44 PM, Mark Lause wrote:
> This is great.  What's the plan of action?
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Marxism] Should the left try to take over the Democratic Party?

[Gary MacLennan via Marxism]

  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.
*

Very interesting, Lou.  Very.  I cannot of course speak to the American
context.  I was interested though to read that you thought a left wing
party was a possibility at the moment or sometime reasonably soon.

I did think that the British context is relevant to the take over
discussion.  Precisely because it is not a shell, the Corbynites have been
able to colonize the level of party membership within the British Labour
Party.  It is that fact that is transforming left politics in the UK and
excited the likes of Richard Seymour (and myself). Corbyn's two electoral
victories were a direct challenge to the layer where power traditionally
resided - namely the Parliamentary Labour Party. Corbyn defeated the PLP,
especially in his second campaign.

Power has, in response, retreated to the National Executive Committee,
which blatantly and undemocratically created an Anti-Corbyn majority
overnight by appointing right wingers from Scotland and Wales as executive
members. So the result has been a kind of stale mate which leaves Corbyn at
the mercy of a protracted sniping campaign from his enemies in the
executive and the PLP.

The moral of the UK story is that takeover bids are extremely difficult.
Power protects itself and flows to where it can do so. If you have a notion
of ontological depth, this process is easier to grasp.

I suspect that within the Democratic Party this would be even more so.  The
metaphor of the "shell" would turn out to be very misleading. Power would
flow to a layer which we might not even suspect exists.

It would appear, maybe, that I have used power here almost in the
Foucauldian sense. Nothing could be further from my intentions. It is the
class power of the bourgeoisie that I have in mind. And that power created
the Democratic Party and will not easily surrender it.

comradely

Gary
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Clay Claiborne on Syria and Jill Stein, responding to Louis on muftah.org

[Mark Lause via Marxism]

  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.
*

What!  Didn't Marx favor voting for Louis Napoleon to keep the
reactionaries from taking power? At the very time Marx was writing this,
Horace Greeley was yowling in the New York Tribune that voting for an
abolitionist party rather than the Whigs aided only the proslavery
Democrats (as though the Whigs weren't proslavery in their own right).

ML
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Voting for the lesser danger

[Louis Proyect via Marxism]

  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.
*

On 11/7/16 5:17 PM, Jeff wrote:

Just saying that they are both pro-capitalist could be a repeat of the
ultraleft Stalinist tact in 1933 where Hitler was just another bourgeois
politician, in fact one that would be easier to defeat subsequently. Right.


You need to read Leon Trotsky on the rise of fascism in Germany. I can't 
waste bandwidth explaining the ABC's to you but you at least need to be 
more familiar with Marxism on such matters before embarrassing yourself.

_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Marxism] Voting for the lesser danger

[Jeff via Marxism]

  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.
*

On 2016-11-07 22:39, Louis Proyect via Marxism wrote:


Jeff, I have no idea of what your connection to Marxism is but when
you speak of principles, there is none more sacrosanct that refusing
to vote for bourgeois parties.


I'm glad you used the word "sacrosanct" rather than "well thought 
through in relation to the immediate context." Indeed, if you had asked 
me in previous years I would have used your exact formulation. Now I 
would change the "sacrosanct" principle to refusing to SUPPORT bourgeois 
parties. People should vote against Trump in order to stop what could be 
a fascist take-over (a danger that also exists if he loses the vote), 
and Clinton should absolutely NOT be supported. Marxists should tell the 
truth about her, and also the truth about Trump, neither of which 
deserves support, and then choose the best voting TACTIC. Just saying 
that they are both pro-capitalist could be a repeat of the ultraleft 
Stalinist tact in 1933 where Hitler was just another bourgeois 
politician, in fact one that would be easier to defeat subsequently. 
Right.


Also, I don't believe anything is so "sacrosanct" even in your own 
judgement. On Marxmail I read one after another glowing accounts (and 
some less glowing) of Bernie Sanders' campaign. Indeed it would have 
been possible for him to have won the nomination (especially if the 
Democratic party had been more democratic!). I have no doubt whatsoever 
that in that case a number of comrades on this list would have made an 
exception to that sacrosanct principle and urged a vote for him -- that 
is, a vote for the Democratic party ticket! -- in the general election. 
And you know it.


The difference is that I'm not talking about giving the party any 
political support, just checking a box on the ballot as part of a 
(hopefully) well-thought out strategy in the case where a vote for only 
one of two parties has an effect on the outcome. When a fascist is 
running for power, as they are in a number of European countries 
(including here in Holland next March), defeating the fascist is a 
priority that goes beyond the propaganda that a socialist campaign can 
effect. But in most countries there is a parliament which decides the 
head of state so you can vote for any party that will gain seats, for 
the same effect. But in cases like France, or the U.S., you get an 
election where the best you can do is place a check-mark where it will 
count against the fascist, effectively voting for the status-quo as a 
lesser danger.


Same goes for Brexit, come to think of it, where most on this list 
recognized the reason to vote "no". I know people who would say "What? 
So you are supporting the power of the EU, all 28 states??" Well yes, 
the UK staying in the EU (the status quo) doesn't represent the danger 
that the Brexit initiative does. So in that particular case, you vote 
for 28 capitalist states and against the increased independence of 1 
capitalist state. All of these examples involve THINKING about the exact 
circumstances you face, rather than just holding ideas formulated 
decades ago as "sacrosanct" with no further thought allowed.


- Jeff
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Clay Claiborne on Syria and Jill Stein, responding to Louis on muftah.org

[Thomas via Marxism]

  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.
*


“Even In Constituencies Where There Is No Prospect Of Our Candidate Being 
Elected, The Workers Must Nevertheless Put Up Candidates In Order To Maintain 
Their Independence”

“They Must Not Allow Themselves To Be Diverted From This Work By The Stock 
Argument That To Split The Vote Of The Democrats Means Assisting The 
Reactionary Parties”

March 1850 By Karl Marx, Address of the Central Committee to the Communist 
League [Excerpts]

With a view to checking the power and the growth of big capital, the democratic 
party demands a reform of the laws of inheritance and legacies, likewise the 
transfer of the public services and as many industrial undertakings as possible 
to the state and municipal authorities.

As for the workingmen – well, they should remain wage workers: for whom, 
however, the democratic party would procure higher wages, better labor 
conditions, and a secure existence.

The democrats hope to achieve that partly through state and municipal 
management and through welfare institutions. In short, they hope to bribe the 
working class into quiescence and thus to weaken their revolutionary spirit by 
momentary concessions and comforts.

The democratic demands can never satisfy the party of the proletariat.

While the democratic petty bourgeoisie would like to bring the revolution to a 
close as soon as their demands are more or less complied with, it is our and 
our task to make the revolution permanent, to keep it going until all the 
ruling and possessing classes are deprived of power, the governmental machinery 
occupied by the proletariat, and the organization of the working classes of all 
lands is so far advanced that all rivalry and competition among themseIves has 
ceased until the more important forces of production are concentrated in the 
hands of the proletarians

With us it is not a matter of reforming private property, but of abolishing it; 
not of hushing up class antagonism, but of abolishing the classes; not of 
ameliorating the existing society, but of establishing a new one.

Even in constituencies where there is no prospect of our candidate being 
elected, the workers must nevertheless put up candidates in order to maintain 
their independence, to steel their forces, to gauge their own strength and to 
bring their revolutionary position and party views before the public

They must not allow themselves to be diverted from this work by the stock 
argument that to split the vote of the democrats means assisting the 
reactionary parties.

All such talk is but calculated to cheat the proletariat.

The advance which the Proletarian Party will make through its independent 
political attitude is infinitely more important than the disadvantages of 
having a few more reactionaries in the national representation.

The gist of the matter is this: In case of an attack on a common adversary no 
special union is necessary; in the fight with such an enemy the interests of 
both parties, the middle-class democrats and the working-class party, coincide 
for the moment, and both parties will carry it on by a temporary understanding.

This was so in the past, and will be so in the future.

It is a matter of course that in the future sanguinary conflicts, as in all 
previous ones, the workingmen by their courage, resolution, and self-sacrifice, 
will form the main force in the attainment of victory.

As hitherto, so in the coming struggle, the petty bourgeoisie as a whole will 
maintain an attitude of delay, irresolution, and inactivity as long as 
possible, in order that, as soon as victory is assured, they may arrogate it to 
themselves and call upon the workers to remain quiet, return to work, avoid 
so-called excesses, and thus to shut off the workers from the fruits of victory.

T


-Original Message-
>From: Louis Proyect via Marxism 
>Sent: Nov 7, 2016 4:39 PM
>To: Thomas F Barton 
>Subject: Re: [Marxism] Clay Claiborne on Syria and Jill Stein, responding to 
>Louis on muftah.org
>
>
>On 11/7/16 4:31 PM, Jeff via Marxism wrote:
>>
>> Personally I don't think the Stein campaign is of great importance, but
>> this piece also takes on broader questions of Syria and the (Western)
>> left, and the way principles can be so easily compromised.
>
>Jeff, I have no idea of what your connection to Marxism is but when you 
>speak of principles, there is none more sacrosanct that refusing to vote 
>for bourgeois parties. All you need to do is read V.I. Lenin on the 
>Cadets. The fact that Clay was so completely isolated on Marxmail should 
>give you an idea of where people stand.

Re: [Marxism] Clay Claiborne on Syria and Jill Stein, responding to Louis on muftah.org

[Louis Proyect via Marxism]

  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.
*

On 11/7/16 4:31 PM, Jeff via Marxism wrote:


Personally I don't think the Stein campaign is of great importance, but
this piece also takes on broader questions of Syria and the (Western)
left, and the way principles can be so easily compromised.


Jeff, I have no idea of what your connection to Marxism is but when you 
speak of principles, there is none more sacrosanct that refusing to vote 
for bourgeois parties. All you need to do is read V.I. Lenin on the 
Cadets. The fact that Clay was so completely isolated on Marxmail should 
give you an idea of where people stand.

_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Marxism] Clay Claiborne on Syria and Jill Stein, responding to Louis on muftah.org

[Jeff via Marxism]

  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.
*

Personally I don't think the Stein campaign is of great importance, but 
this piece also takes on broader questions of Syria and the (Western) 
left, and the way principles can be so easily compromised.

- Jeff

http://muftah.org/america-syria-green-party/

For America & Syria’s Sake, Don’t Vote Green
Clay Claiborne
November 7th, 2016

In general, the Western left has taken a shameful attitude toward the 
Syrian conflict. Instead of supporting the Syrian people’s struggle 
against dictatorship, many leftists have promoted an anachronistic view 
of Russia and its allies, and accused Syrian revolutionaries of being 
Western proxies. The approach to Syria taken by the U.S. Green Party, 
which is largely representative of the left in the United States, 
largely reflects these tendencies.


Louis Proyect, a well-respected radical that for eighteen years has run 
MarxMail, an email list-serve of over 1500 Marxists activists and 
scholars, has, until recently, been a strong supporter of the Syrian 
revolution. He, like me, went against the tide of non-interventionist 
sentiment and supported Libyans and Syrians fighting against 
Russian-backed dictators to bring democracy to their countries.


Anyone who has taken this path knows it can be a hard and lonely road. 
As it turns out, supporting the “wrong” revolutions can lose you friends 
fast on the American left. But, this year Proyect decided to come in 
from the cold and support the Green Party’s presidential candidate, Jill 
Stein – an American politician who actively favors the regime of Syrian 
President Bashar al-Assad.


Proyect’s support for the Stein campaign raises questions about how he 
can square this decision with his opposition to the Assad regime. He 
attempted to address this divergence in The Green Party and Syria, which 
was published on Muftah, on October 4, 2016. In his article, Proyect 
excuses Stein’s terrible position on Syria, in the service of building a 
third-party in American politics. It is a position that is both naïve 
and dangerous.

Jill Stein and Syria

As far as Jill Stein is concerned, the U.S. government must work with 
Syria, Russia, and Iran to restore all of Syria to Assad’s control. 
Stein posted a statement to this effect on her campaign website, 
Jill2016.org, on November 2, 2015. I call it “Putin Approved,” because 
it is hard to imagine what Assad or Russian President Vladimir Putin 
would not like about the policy position.


In her statement, Stein supports the legitimacy of the 
forty-five-year-old Assad dictatorship, and by implication, certifies as 
legitimate Assad’s June 2014 88.7% election victory, in the midst of a 
raging civil war. She defines all rebels as “jihadi terrorists,” 
mimicking Assad’s own position on the opposition. Stein goes on to 
insist that no liberated areas of Syria should remain outside of Assad’s 
control, not even Rojava, a leftist Kurdish region that has managed to 
win a degree of autonomy. At no point does she present a plan for shared 
governance or a transition from Assad’s rule.


On October 5, 2016 the Stein campaign deleted the statement and quietly 
replaced it with a shorter, less transparently pro-Assad policy. The 
revision was not mentioned on the campaign website, but was called out 
in a number of tweets.


Despite this attempted face saving, it cannot be forgotten that Jill 
Stein has, in effect, demanded that every gain made by suffering and 
martyrdom since the Syrian revolution began in 2011 be abandoned and 
that “all of Syria” be returned to conditions of police state terror.


While in Stein’s conspiracy fantasy world there are many theories about 
how U.S. President Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton “orchestrated regime 
change” in Syria, the reality is that the Syrian people just got fed up. 
If Stein did not so easily fall for dictators willing to mouth off about 
Israel, and appreciated the everyday struggles of those living under 
Muammar Gaddafi in Libya or Bashar al-Assad in Syria, she would see that 
the impetus for revolution or “regime change” in those countries came 
from the people themselves.


While Stein is free to believe Damascus’s denials about using sarin gas 
and barrel bombs, numerous reports from Amnesty International, Human 
Rights Watch and the United Nations make it clear that the Assad 
government is a criminal regime with no regard for the right of it 
citizens. But, since the people either do not exist or are not that 
important for her, Stein can disregard their struggles, and, instead, 
take a self-important view that puts her country at the center of every 
important global event.

Proyect on Stein

In his Muftah, 

[Marxism] Fwd: The Supermanagerial Reich - Los Angeles Review of Books

[Louis Proyect via Marxism]

  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 parallel between the Nazi “revolution” in the 1930s and the 
neoliberal “revolution” in the 1980s and ’90s goes much further. The 
Nazis were also pioneers in what was then the uncharted economic waters 
of “privatization.” In the face of the Great Depression, states across 
the world — including the Social Democratic led Weimar Republic — 
nationalized key industries and, in some cases, like Germany, nearly the 
entirety of the financial sector. The Nazis — despite early propaganda 
indicating otherwise — were the unique exception. Not only did they 
avoid further nationalization but they innovated a process so 
idiosyncratic at the time that it required coining a German neologism: 
Reprivatisierung.


full: https://lareviewofbooks.org/article/the-supermanagerial-reich/
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Marxism] Fwd: David Cobb, the Greens and the Collapse of the Left

[Louis Proyect via Marxism]

  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.
*

By Joshua Frank.

http://www.counterpunch.org/2004/10/09/david-cobb-the-greens-and-the-collapse-of-the-left/
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Marxism] (no subject)

[Andrew Stewart via Marxism]

  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.
*

I'm trying to build up efforts for the RI Green Party and, though I don't like 
playing gossip games, I have a few questions regarding David Cobb and the 2004 
campaign. What was the conflict involving Peter Camejo about? Did anyone read 
Greg Gerritt's book on the topic?


Message: 8
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2016 09:09:09 -0500
From: Louis Proyect 
To: marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu
Subject: Re: [Marxism] Fwd: Chris Hedges: Defying the Politics of Fear
   - Chris Hedges - Truthdig
Message-ID: 
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed

> On 11/7/16 8:56 AM, Andrew Pollack via Marxism wrote:
> I can't imagine Stein and Baraka were happy about his invocation of the
> anti-Stalinist movements in Eastern Europe.

In fact most Stein supporters, including me, would have preferred Chris 
Hedges as a presidential candidate with Cornel West as VP candidate. Or 
vice versa. But the Green Party will outlive whatever flaws of the 
current candidates. Their contribution is to raise its profile as a 
party that does not accommodate to the Democrats even though there were 
some indications that there was intense pressure to do so over the past 
few weeks, something we can thank the dirtbag David Cobb for.
Best regards,
Andrew Stewart 
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Marxism] FYI - Only the Privileged Can Afford Hillary Clinton

[Ken Hiebert via Marxism]

  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.
*

http://www.internationalviewpoint.org/spip.php?article4759

A vote for Clinton is not only a wasted vote for the status quo, it is a vote 
against the Green Party’s challenge to the two-party system of corporate rule.
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Marxism] Fwd: Should the left try to take over the Democratic Party?

[Louis Proyect via Marxism]

  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.
*

Should the left try to take over the Democratic Party? That question is 
answered affirmatively in Benjamin Kunkel’s Sweet ’16: Notes on the US 
Election that appeared in Salvage, a British journal launched by Richard 
Seymour and other well-known Marxists in July 2015. Meanwhile, Jacobin 
founder Bhaskar Sunkara and managing editor Nicole Aschoff, a lecturer 
in sociology at Johns Hopkins, make the case that Only Socialism Can 
Defeat Trumpism in The Nation, an article that might be more properly 
titled “Only a Reformed Democratic Party Can Defeat Trumpism”.


Despite the freshness of magazines like Salvage and Jacobin, there is 
something a bit musty about such advice. When you consider Kunkel’s role 
as a founder of the very smart and sassy n+1, you have all bases of 
Young Turk Marxist journals covered. Considering the hoary past of the 
Democratic Party hostile takeover strategy, you’d think that there would 
be an aversion to the Earl Browder shuffle from insurgent youth. But 
then again, Jacobin has always been friendly with Dissent Magazine, a 
proponent of working in the DP just as much as the CPUSA’s Political 
Affairs journal.


To some extent, this might have been expected given n+1, Salvage and 
Jacobin’s infatuation with the Sanders campaign. When Sanders turned out 
to be much more of a Democratic Party insider than an insurgent, many on 
the left were reconciled to fall into line behind him since “Trumpism” 
(whatever that is) was considered such a threat. Speaking with Marxist 
authority second to none, Adolph Reed wrote a provocatively titled piece 
Vote for the Lying Neoliberal Warmonger: It’s Important that probably 
had the effect of allowing the smart, young Marxists to support Hillary 
Clinton, the candidate of the oldest, continuously functioning 
capitalist party in the world. Reed was like a rabbi telling a Reform 
congregation that it was okay to eat shrimp.


full: http://www.thenorthstar.info/?p=12948
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Marxism] SURVIVING INFILTRATION: Palestinian Rights, Islamophobia, and Repression | 6PM 11/9 @NYU Law

[A.R. G via Marxism]

  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.
*

*I apologize in advance if you are receiving a duplicate of this e-mail.*

SURVIVING INFILTRATION: Palestinian Rights, Islamophobia, and Repression | 6PM
11/9 NYU Law (Vanderbilt Hall 220, 40 Washington Square South)

https://www.facebook.com/events/232800650471965/


Join the National Lawyers Guild at NYU and Al-Awda New York to discuss how
one activist group experienced and survived attempts by the New York Police
Department to infiltrate and destroy a major Palestinian-American
grassroots organizing initiative.

Leaders of the Al-Awda New York Palestine Right to Return Coalition will
discuss the group’s founding, post 9-11 experiences, expansion, NYPD
infiltration, survival, successes, and upcoming program. They will discuss
in detail their Analysis of Palestine in the expanding Palestine solidarity
movement.

The panelists will also address the Handschu guidelines and recent legal
victories against the NYPD’s illegal mass surveillance of Muslim
communities throughout New York and the East Coast of the United States.

*Lamis Deek* is a New York based Human Rights Activist and Attorney who
practices in the fields of domestic and international civil rights,
criminal defense and crisis management. From Nablus, Palestine, Lamis Deek
joined Al-Awda-New York shortly after its inception in 2000. Known to be a
peoples’ lawyer, she has been honored by the National Lawyers Guild and
other institutions for her work defending Palestinian, Muslim, immigrant,
activists communities targeted for government surveillance and predatory
prosecutions.

Suzanne Adely is a global labor and human rights lawyer and long time
community organizer. She is a National Lawyers Guild International
Committee Co-Chair, a member of the Bureau of International Association of
Democratic Lawyers, Al-Awda-NY, Labor for Palestine, and the Global Workers
Solidarity Network.

David Letwin is a teacher from Brooklyn New York, and is a co-founder of
Jews for Palestinian Right of Return.
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Fwd: Chris Hedges: Defying the Politics of Fear - Chris Hedges - Truthdig

[Mark Lause via Marxism]

  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 drive to swap votes with Democrats in "safe states" was a real
challenge.  I was pleasantly surprised that sections of the party who would
have gone for this in the past did not this time.

The real challenge, though, is whether the party has actually built
anything out of this campaign.  I think there are sections of it that are
still confused as to what is required of a being a genuine independent
political party at this point in time.
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Marxism] learning to think

[Andrew Pollack via Marxism]

  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.
*

Today's Socialist Worker has two replies to Ashley Smith's recent article
applying Trotsky's "Learn to Think" to Syria. Ashley's article praised
Trotsky's method there (as have others of us on this list, including Louis).
Below are my comments to Ashley on the replies, which can be read at:
https://socialistworker.org/2016/11/07/rethinking-what-we-should-learn
I wrote:
"Peterson's comments are just Shachtmanite nonsense."
[On that score, see all of https://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/idom/dm/
-- Andy]
"Adams is a more serious problem as he's clearly bought much of the campist
line.
"He argues against the No Fly Zone on reasonable technical grounds,
although the stuff about not provoking Russia is more worthy of the UFPJ
list. But he doesn't address the Manpads or other equipment requested. Plus
he opposes 'food not bombs' slogans as 'not what the US military does.' But
that's not the point: in this case we raise the demand in order to expose
our rulers' hypocrisy - and thus to make possible other forces' ability to
deliver food. (And in fact the US military HAS delivered food in other
countries.)
"Finally and most importantly he declares the revolution over and has not
one word to say about the existing grassroots committees."
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Fwd: Chris Hedges: Defying the Politics of Fear - Chris Hedges - Truthdig

[Louis Proyect via Marxism]

  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.
*

On 11/7/16 8:56 AM, Andrew Pollack via Marxism wrote:

I can't imagine Stein and Baraka were happy about his invocation of the
anti-Stalinist movements in Eastern Europe.


In fact most Stein supporters, including me, would have preferred Chris 
Hedges as a presidential candidate with Cornel West as VP candidate. Or 
vice versa. But the Green Party will outlive whatever flaws of the 
current candidates. Their contribution is to raise its profile as a 
party that does not accommodate to the Democrats even though there were 
some indications that there was intense pressure to do so over the past 
few weeks, something we can thank the dirtbag David Cobb for.

_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Fwd: Chris Hedges: Defying the Politics of Fear - Chris Hedges - Truthdig

[Andrew Pollack via Marxism]

  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.
*

Good for him!
I can't imagine Stein and Baraka were happy about his invocation of the
anti-Stalinist movements in Eastern Europe.
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Marxism] Fwd: Chris Hedges: Defying the Politics of Fear - Chris Hedges - Truthdig

[Louis Proyect via Marxism]

  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.
*

Chris Hedges gave this talk Saturday evening at a rally in Philadelphia 
for Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein and her running mate, 
Ajamu Baraka.


No social or revolutionary movement succeeds without a core of people 
who will not betray their vision and their principles. They are the 
building blocks of social change. They are our only hope for a viable 
socialism. They are willing to spend their lives as political outcasts. 
They are willing to endure repression. They will not sell out the 
oppressed and the poor. They know that you stand with all of the 
oppressed—people of color in our prisons and marginal communities, the 
poor, unemployed workers, our GBLT community, undocumented workers, the 
mentally ill and the Palestinians, Iraqis and Afghans whom we terrorize 
and murder—or you stand with none of the oppressed. They know when you 
fight for the oppressed you get treated like the oppressed. They know 
this is the cost of the moral life, a life that is not abandoned even if 
means you are destined to spend generations wandering in the wilderness, 
even if you are destined to fail.


I was in East Germany, Czechoslovakia and Romania in 1989 during the 
revolutions, or in the case of Romania an interparty putsch. These 
revolutions were spontaneous outbursts by an enraged population that had 
had enough of communist repression, mismanagement and corruption. No 
one, from the dissidents themselves to the ruling communist parties, 
anticipated these revolts. They erupted, as all revolutions do, from 
tinder that had been waiting years for a spark.


These revolutions were led by a handful of dissidents who until the fall 
of 1989 were marginal and dismissed by the state as inconsequential 
until it was too late. The state periodically sent state security to 
harass them. It often ignored them. I am not even sure you could call 
these dissidents an opposition. They were profoundly isolated within 
their own societies. The state media denied them a voice. They had no 
legal status and were locked out of the political system. They were 
blacklisted. They struggled to make a living. But when the breaking 
point in Eastern Europe came, when the ruling communist ideology lost 
all credibility, there was no question in the minds of the public about 
whom they could trust. The demonstrators that poured into the streets of 
East Berlin and Prague were aware of who would sell them out and who 
would not. They trusted those, such as Václav Havel, who had dedicated 
their lives to fighting for open society, those who had been willing to 
be condemned as nonpersons and go to jail for their defiance.


Our only chance to overthrow corporate power comes from those who will 
not surrender to it, who will hold fast to the causes of the oppressed 
no matter what the price, who are willing to be dismissed and reviled by 
a bankrupt liberal establishment, who have found within themselves the 
courage to say no, to refuse to cooperate. The most important issue in 
this election does not revolve around the personal traits of Hillary 
Clinton or Donald Trump. It revolves around the destructive dynamic of 
unfettered and unregulated global capitalism, the crimes of imperialism 
and the security and surveillance apparatus. These forces are where real 
power lies. Trump and Clinton will do nothing to restrict them.


full: 
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/defying_the_politics_of_fear_20161106

_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Marxism] Alison Weir backs Stein -- FOR THE LAST TWO MINUTES?

[Jeff via Marxism]

  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.
*

At 00:21 07-11-16 -0500, A.R. G via Marxism wrote:
>
>http://imgur.com/a/xYL8r
>
>^^^A screenshot from Alison Weir's public Facebook page.
>
>It was already obvious that Jeff was lying when he falsely accused Weir of
>backing Trump.

Alright, I saw the screenshot and acknowledged that I was wrong (not
"lying") when I asserted that she was supporting Trump. But looking again
at the screenshot Amith managed to efficiently post to the list, it shows
(and I had to double-check this interpretation because I don't use
Facebook) that Alison Weir had posted that item exactly two minutes
beforehand!

Well I still acknowledge my error in mischaracterizing her position on the
elections, and if she wrote that then I will accept that she indeed
supports Jill Stein, not Trump as I had assumed from her earlier having
posted the objectionable piece on the CNI site. But now I don't feel so
stupid for having made that mistake, given that I wrote that at what would
have been 17:03 New York Time, whereas the screenshot was at 0:16 showing
that Weir had posted her preference in the elections at 0:14, just two
minutes before!

So regardless of my own mistake, I detect a bit of subterfuge on Amith's
part: he clearly contacted Weir, had her post that to Facebook, took the
screenshot 2 minutes later, and managed to post the screenshot using a web
service, sending us the link 5 minutes later. Amith: that was a lot of
trouble to go through just to prove me wrong! I'd think a forwarded email
from her would have sufficed.

Of course what I REALLY would have liked to have seen would be proof that
she already had a record in supporting Stein, like from before I brought
the issue up. Amith and Weir together have gone to some trouble to post
something to the list that should have been posted on her Facebook page (or
elsewhere) much earlier, not just 2 days before the election and hours
after I had written what I (incorrectly, I gather) assumed her position
was. What's more, if Amith had actually known Weir's position in supporting
Stein, he surely would have mentioned that in his first reply to me at
17:18 when he told people to "ignore" me. So it appears he had to contact
her first to find out if I really was wrong, and then for her to post her
position on Facebook to look as if it had been a public position of hers --
FOR MORE THAN THE LAST 2 MINUTES.

- Jeff



_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Marxism] Occupy Providence 5 Years Later: Thoughts and Reflections

[Andrew Stewart via Marxism]

  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.
*


http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/11/07/occupy-providence-5-years-later-thoughts-and-reflections/


Best regards,
Andrew Stewart 
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Alison Weir backs Jill Stein

[Jeff via Marxism]

  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.
*

On 2016-11-07 07:26, Ken Hiebert via Marxism wrote:


http://imgur.com/a/xYL8r
Thanks for this useful information.


Yes of course this contradicts what I had assumed and I sincerely do 
apologize to her for having misrepresented her position. I was obviously 
mistaken.



Earlier I posted an item from the Council for the National Interest.

http://www.councilforthenationalinterest.org/new/?p=4221#.WB7a-yMrKNV
I think it is fair to say that the CNI article has a very different
message.


That article was written by Philip Giraldi who is described at the 
bottom of the article as "a former CIA officer, is executive director of 
the Council for the National Interest. This article first appeared in 
The American Conservative." I saw the piece and still see it as a 
Trump-inspired Clinton-bashing article. At the bottom it did say "Posted 
by Alison Weir on Oct 21 2016." But of course Alison Weir (president of 
CNI) may have just done so in an administrative manner for an article 
written by the executive director, which differs from her own views. I 
acknowledge my error and what I ascribed to Weir in my post is in error, 
but still applies to that right-wing anti-Israel organization as a 
whole.


- Jeff
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com