[Marxism] The Canberra Anti-Racism Rally kicked their sorry arses

[John Passant 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 Canberra Anti-Racism Rally kicked their sorry arses

Well done to all those in Canberra who attended this great turnout to confront 
the racists. We outnumbered them five to one. We kicked their sorry arses.

http://enpassant.com.au/2015/07/19/the-canberra-anti-racism-rally-kicked-their-sorry-arses/


_
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] Not about Greece, but, well y'know...

[Hans G Ehrbar 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.
*


Gary wrote that Panitch and Gindin's Plan B ... "would have the Left in
Greece morph into a Leftist version of the Salvation Army or St Vincent
De Paul."

I think I know where Gary (and others on this list) are coming from.
Charities do not transcend capitalism: they exist only so that the
capitalist maldistribution of wealth can continute to exist, which
perpetuates poverty amidst plenty.  In socialism, soup kitchens will not
be needed.  They are not an arena for class struggle.

This is one of the areas where strategies that used to be wrong become
right.  It is a big issue, which gets to the heart of the Marxian theory
of wages and profits.  Here is a brief recap:

According to the labor theory of value, profits come from the unpaid
labor of the workers.  The pay check is not an equivalent of the value
produced, but it is a glorified cost of living allowance, calculated
just to be enough so that the worker can survive and come back to work
for the capitalist again.  Marx's goal is to overcome the wage labor
system, so that the workers themselves have a say over and can benefit
from the full amount of wealth they create.

What becomes of this when we must retreat from excess consumption for
ecological reasons?  Then the question is exactly reversed: instead of
asking: how can we rise above an income that just reproduces us as needy
individuals while leaving all the extra wealth created to the
capitalist, now the question is: how can we satisfy our needs with the
smallest possible environmental footprint?  Instead of expanding the
income of the workers as much as possible over necessary labor, now we
must define what necessary labor for a dignified and happy life is and
reduce the work day to this necessary labor alone.  How can we have a
high quality of life while minimizing the stuff that has to be produced
industrially with its inevitable and irreversible damage of the
ecosystem?

This is what becomes of Marx's theories of capitalist exploitation
when we no longer have an economy of abundance but when a retreat
to more modest lifestyles is necessary.

Since there is not much time, not enough time to wrest control of
industrial production away from the capitalists, I propose the following
second-best strategy: capitalists will continue to make profits in the
industrial sector, but the working class should aim to build a
solidarity economy outside the industrial sector, so that the industrial
sector becomes a smaller and smaller part of the overall economy.

Charities are the beginning of this solidarity economy.  Their goal is
not to make people rich but to allow people to satisfy their needs.
Marx's question "what is the daily value of labor-power" is a practical
question central to their operations.  The myth that people depending on
charities must be doing something wrong is losing plausibility.  Working
class people today know that they are only a storm, flood, or fire away
from becoming dependent on charitable organizations, and, due to climate
change, it is only a matter of time until these storms, floods, and
fires arrive.  Therefore calls to improve charities and participate in
them do not fall on deaf ears.  Their own hardship makes people more
generous towards others.

Europe depends on charities less than the US because they have a better
state-financed safety net.  Greece has charities for drug addicts and
those who can no longer pay their health insurance and for the stream of
refugees entering the EU at its strategic southeast corner.  More and
more these charities are needed by ordinary Greeks.  If organized right,
these charities can become centers for solidarity between refugees and
Greek citizens, for self-organization and resistance, and for life with
a low ecological footprint.

Crete has 5 different local currencies.  On the islands, people know
each other and can build trust and reciprocity, which is necessary for
these local currencies to work.  And there is a barter economy: if a
carpenter needs a lawyer or doctor, he pays by building furniture for
them, in some cities, Greeks can go the the theatre by bringing food,
the olive harvest is also an opportunity for beneficial barters.  Often,
one family member works in Germany, and their remittances allow the rest
of the family to survive in this solidarity economy.  Some Greeks move
back home because they see a challenge where they can make a difference.
The European freedom of movement is very important for these coping
strategies.

In Greece, the capitalists have already retreated and left their
production facilities empty and their workers unemployed.  This is an
opportunity to expand the solidarity economy.  Allo

Re: [Marxism] The moderator's note

[Charles Faulkner 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.
*

Louis, 

I completely understand your frustration but second Michael's appeal for 
another chance. The list simply is better with as many differing views as 
possible. Some of these views are wildly contrary to my own but I find their 
airing to be instructive and actually help in forming a stronger set of 
beliefs. 

But I'm not unsubbing. You are perfectly within your rights. In any event it 
was your essays that drew me here, not Jim Creegan's. 

But please reconsider. 

- Original Message -

From: "Michael Karadjis via Marxism"  
To: "Charles Faulkner"  
Cc: "James Creegan"  
Sent: Saturday, July 18, 2015 6:11:28 PM 
Subject: Re: [Marxism] The moderator's note 

 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. 
* 

Louis, please let's start this over. I don't want someone to be kicked 
off due to him replying to a post of mine. Jim may have lashed out at 
other times (we all get hot under the collar, including you and I) but 
this reply of his was hardly a fire and brimstone sectarian rant. We 
need this discussion because no-one around here, except those living in 
Greece, really has any real idea of what the hell. We're all expressing 
our opinions and learning from each others' points. I'd probably be 
saying something different this week and something different last week. 
It is also a matter of interpretation how to interpret the marxmail 
guidelines you sent. Jim was doing what he thinks is class analysis. I 
profoundly disagree with his interpretation of class analysis. But 
having a form of analysis I disagree with doesn't prove he is playing at 
being Trotsky or being the best Bolshevik. And this list would lose 
hugely if it also meant people like Andrew Pollack and Marv Gandall were 
unsubbed as well. Let's start again and all agree to be respectful in 
this discussion. 

_ 
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm 
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/lacenaire%40comcast.net 

_
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] The moderator's note

[Michael Karadjis 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.
*

Louis, please let's start this over. I don't want someone to be kicked 
off due to him replying to a post of mine. Jim may have lashed out at 
other times (we all get hot under the collar, including you and I) but 
this reply of his was hardly a fire and brimstone sectarian rant. We 
need this discussion because no-one around here, except those living in 
Greece,  really has any real idea of what the hell. We're all expressing 
our opinions and learning from each others' points. I'd probably be 
saying something different this week and something different last week. 
It is also a matter of interpretation how to interpret the marxmail 
guidelines you sent. Jim was doing what he thinks is class analysis. I 
profoundly disagree with his interpretation of class analysis. But 
having a form of analysis I disagree with doesn't prove he is playing at 
being Trotsky or being the best Bolshevik. And this list would lose 
hugely if it also meant people like Andrew Pollack and Marv Gandall were 
unsubbed as well. Let's start again and all agree to be respectful in 
this discussion. 


_
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] Not about Greece, but, well y'know...

[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.
*

The terrible defeat in Greece has left us all confused, angry, resentful
and desperate.  Those of us who like myself have rejected the sects
approach and pinned all our faith on broad formations have been most
effected.  For the sects this must seem like a true historical
justification.  "We told you so" has been either whispered or strongly
implied.

We on the pro broad front strategy have tried various maneuvers to cope
with what is really deep grief.  My old friend of over 20 years standing,
the moderator of the list, Comrade Lou seems to have taken refuge in "It
can't be done" particularly with reference to a return to the Drachma.  I
have no doubt Lou is correct about the difficulties. It is all so far above
my head.

But I am reminded forcibly of two scenes from the bourgeois side.  The
Malvinas have just been restored to Argentinian sovereignty. Thatcher
convenes a meeting of the Chiefs of the Armed Forces.  They tell her in
effect "It can't be done".  She snarls at them "Don't tell me what you
can't do. Tell me what you can do".  The rest is history.  The legend of
the Iron Lady is born.  Her gospel of TINA spreads around the world and
infects even the brains of some Canadian Marxists.

The second scene is from a movie or a mini series, I don't recall which.
Roosevelt has convened a meeting of his Chiefs of staff to plot revenge for
Pearl Harbor.  He wants Tokyo bombed.  They tell him "It can't be done".
He struggles to his feet, something which his polio induced paralysis makes
very difficult.  An adjutant hurries to help him.  Roosevelt snaps at him
":Stand aside". He stands and then looks at the Chiefs of Staff and says
"Don't tell me it can't be done!". Again the rest is history.

In all sincerity, I think we could learn more than a little from "Don't
tell me, it can't be done".

What precisely can be done in the Greek situation is of course a matter for
debate and primarily the comrades and people of Greece. But I have no doubt
at all that our sympathy and solidarity should be with the men and women of
honor, who rejected the new memorandum.  I will not have a bar of any
attempt to resuscitate the reputation of Alexis Tsipras.  He has chosen his
path and he no longer has anything of good to offer the people he
betrayed.

But I want to say now with considerable force to those comrades who
supported the broad front conception, 'All is not lost'.  We do not have to
resort to denial or resort to TINA or to abuse of comrades who do not agree
with us. The majority of the Central Committee of Syriza oppose the new
memorandum.  There is something to build on there.  We do not have to
resort to Panitch and Gindin's Plan B  They, beautiful souls that they now
are, would have the Left in Greece morph into a Leftist version of the
Salvation Army or St Vincent De Paul  Within this schema, Alexis Tsipras,
would emerge as the Mother Theresa of Athens.  Every time his government
shafted the people he would do something nice for them as a compensation.
Oh Joy!

Finally, I will put my cards on the table, yet again.  My age and personal
situation prevent me from the kind of political activity I used to exhibit
in days gone by.  But I want desperately before the close to see broad
front anti-austerity politics take root in Australia.  Comrade John from
Canberra asked what was in all probability for him a rhetorical question
"Do we need a Syriza in Australia?".  My answer is still, despite Alexis
Tsipras and Yannis Dragasakis et al,, 'Yes, very much so, Yes."

If I get round to another "Not about Greece post" I will try and address
more of the specifics of my response.  In particular, I hope to do a post
on the Callinicos-Kouvelakis debate in London.

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] The moderator's note

[Manuel Barrera 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.
*

Don't unsub me, Louis. However, while I do understand the impulse to end the 
sectarianism of the revolutionary left--this list is one place where it 
exists--one has to ask whether continuing to allow or disallow pretend class 
analyses of people as interventions into a discussion where there are 
significant differences among serious people has a meaningful role. Frankly, I 
did not realize that Creegan had been undertaking this intervention for six 
months because one only has to read his, and others', posts once or twice to 
see whether there are serious and thoughtful posts being written. Michael K.'s 
reply to Creegan was indeed a thoughtful reply even as Creegan's post(s) can be 
seen as formulaic. I'm sorry for Michael to have spent so much energy just so 
Creegan could make himself appear serious by acknowledging Michael's thinking 
and then, yet again, descending into the same sectarian nonsense. 

Lost in all this handwringing about anti-democratic functioning by Louis for 
putting a stop to this descent into sectarianism (or, more aptly, deeper levels 
of it than we sometimes see) are the more serious issues how to characterize 
both the defeat of the Greek workers and oppressed and the leadership that was 
either "forced" or "destined" ( owing to non-proletarian thinking) to preside 
over this defeat. "Everyone" wants to engage in this character assassination or 
character defense because "everyone" here hasn't EVER had to grapple with what 
do next when you've been elected by the masses to end capitalist oppression. 
Tsipiras has, Varoufakis has, and, to some extent those in Antarsya and the 
other Greek groups have, too. The rest of us are simply talking. Opinionating. 
I wonder whether the descent into (more) sectarianism by the likes of Creegan 
or others is really all that useful? If it is, then perhaps Louis is wrong to 
end the discussion by exclusion. I suppose we'll find out so
 on regarding the wisdom of stopping sectarian intervention--as opposed to 
actual serious discussion--if there is a mass exodus by people on the list over 
democracy.

What might happen to Louis and his approaches to leadership should he join a 
workers party or be part of a mass revolutionary movement will really be a 
function, like the rest of us, should such an event actually transpire and what 
we do then. Arguing such a point is more than meaningless and, to me, seems 
more designed to justify sectarian infighting more than serious discussion. 

Of more important concern to me is the fact, and the context behind, the 
beating and jailing of the FI comrades by "Syriza Riot Police" that Ioannis 
recently posted. I may have missed any posts related to that after his (or 
her?) report and petition, so, if someone can point me to that discussion, I'd 
appreciate it.

  
_
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] Moderator's note

[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.
*

Hi,

I haven't been following closely but compared to the stupid shit that
others who have been booted have said, I can't say I see the sense
in booting Jim. I mean, I accidentally accused someone of being a Nazi and
I was given a second chance (when I apologized for the error).

It's obviously up to Louis but I hate to see leftists getting booted from
one of the few genuine leftist lists (look at some of the other "left"
groups online), especially if it triggers an exodus.





On Saturday, July 18, 2015, Michael Yates via Marxism <
marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu> wrote:

>   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 thought that Michael K replied to Jim C with well-argued points and
> without rancor. Jim C answered in the same way. These are complex issues,
> and passions run deep. So perhaps Louis should reconsider giving Jim C the
> boot. Jim's position would surely not be one alien to Greek radicals, and
> some would surely agree with him. I might argue that his definition of
> class position is too pat and somewhat formulaic. But on the other hand, as
> Michael Lebowitz argues in his new book, The Socialist Imperative: From
> Gotha to Now, and he has consistently argued for years, as we participate
> in production, we produce not only goods and services but ourselves as
> well. So, and especially because the class position we are in has a great
> deal to do with that of our parents, it seems self-evident that whatever
> their intentions and character, those who come from highly educated
> professional families with high incomes are likely to follow in their
> parents' footsteps. They may be sympathetic to working people and radical
> in their writing and thinking, but this doesn't always translate into
> knowing what it is like to be a working person without such advantages, to
> really feel it. They also may well have an entire set of unexamined notions
> and emotions that buttress modes of being that take for granted what they
> have materially and make it seem crazy that they should ever have to give
> these things up. All of this can condition politics, even behind the back,
> so to speak, of such persons.
>
> Anyway, I often go off the deep end berating people, at least in my head,
> for not seeing that their life circumstances, including parental income,
> education, and employment, as well as their own income, education, and
> employment, shape what they believe and the political actions they are
> willing to take. But there is I think always some truth in what I say or
> think about this.
> _
> Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
> Set your options at:
> http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/amithrgupta%40gmail.com
>


-- 
- Amith
_
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] Moderator's note

[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 7/18/15 5:23 PM, Michael Yates via Marxism wrote:

So perhaps Louis should reconsider giving Jim C the boot.


Look.

When Doug Henwood told Creegan on LBO-Talk that converting to the 
drachma might not be a piece of cake, Creegan replied:


"Am I to take this as an ironic comment on Proyect's idiot posts, or an 
implicit apology for the horrendous betrayal that has just taken place?"


Apology for betrayal?

This is what you might expect on Doug's list that has a lot looser norms 
than this one (and unfortunately probably has something to do with its 
becoming pretty dormant.)


When I read this, I concluded that if I had the nerve to write an 
article drawing out the difficulties of converting computer systems to 
handle the drachma, I was guilty of apologizing for betrayal.


I put too much time into keeping this list going to put up with that 
kind of bullshit. If any of you want to start your own mailing list so 
that Jim Creegan can put you under a microscope to see if you have 
petty-bourgeois germs, contact me privately and I'll help you get it set up.





_
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] Moderator's note

[Michael Yates 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 thought that Michael K replied to Jim C with well-argued points and without 
rancor. Jim C answered in the same way. These are complex issues, and passions 
run deep. So perhaps Louis should reconsider giving Jim C the boot. Jim's 
position would surely not be one alien to Greek radicals, and some would surely 
agree with him. I might argue that his definition of class position is too pat 
and somewhat formulaic. But on the other hand, as Michael Lebowitz argues in 
his new book, The Socialist Imperative: From Gotha to Now, and he has 
consistently argued for years, as we participate in production, we produce not 
only goods and services but ourselves as well. So, and especially because the 
class position we are in has a great deal to do with that of our parents, it 
seems self-evident that whatever their intentions and character, those who come 
from highly educated professional families with high incomes are likely to 
follow in their parents' footsteps. They may be sympathetic to working p
 eople and radical in their writing and thinking, but this doesn't always 
translate into knowing what it is like to be a working person without such 
advantages, to really feel it. They also may well have an entire set of 
unexamined notions and emotions that buttress modes of being that take for 
granted what they have materially and make it seem crazy that they should ever 
have to give these things up. All of this can condition politics, even behind 
the back, so to speak, of such persons.

Anyway, I often go off the deep end berating people, at least in my head, for 
not seeing that their life circumstances, including parental income, education, 
and employment, as well as their own income, education, and employment, shape 
what they believe and the political actions they are willing to take. But there 
is I think always some truth in what I say or think about this. 
  
_
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] The moderator's note

[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 7/18/15 4:53 PM, michael a. lebowitz via Marxism wrote:


What the moderator has done by unsubbing Creegan for his posts is also
to exclude the possibility of reading thoughtful responses such as that
of Michael Karadjis. The effect is to turn the list into one of singing
to the choirmaster.
 michael



With all due respect, Michael. I belonged to a party for 11 years in 
which people were summoned to membership review committees to pin down 
when they would go into industry in order to save their petty-bourgeois 
souls.


In the mailing list that preceded this one, a day did not go by when 
people were characterized in a "class analysis" that divided the list 
hopelessly into warring factions. This was the sick culture I was 
determined to prevent from taking hold here. All this talk about Yanis 
Varoufakis's bourgeois life-style has been bandied about on FB for 
months now. It is the same crap that you heard about the Green 
Revolution in Iran--the petty bourgeoisie wanted to be able to drink 
white wine in public so they went to the CIA for help. This is not 
Marxism. It is pop sociology and idiotic. Furthermore, Creegan had been 
pushing this for six months now.


What you think of Tsipras becomes a litmus test. If you think he did not 
have a choice, you are giving aid and comfort to a traitor. All you need 
to do is connect the dotted lines. Stating that a Grexit might lead to a 
disaster worse than staying in the eurozone might mean that you class 
loyalties are suspect.


I put a lot of work in to making this mailing list useful, spending a 
couple of hours each day going through scholarly and popular material 
that would be of interest to Marxists. I don't ask for money because I 
don't really need it. But if there's one thing that I demand, it is not 
to have to put up with people who think that they are Lenin fighting 
against revisionists and traitors. The entire 20th century has been 
marked by left groups splitting apart by this logic. The young 
Argentinian who posts here was too young to know anything about Nahuel 
Moreno but the fact is that his movement split into 20 different groups 
over this kind of "class analysis" that divided the left into the pure 
and the impure. I'd rather terminate Marxmail than to have to put up 
with that kind of baloney.

_
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] Moderator's note

[Marv Gandall 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 Jul 18, 2015, at 4:18 PM, Andrew Pollack via Marxism 
 wrote:
> 
> When push comes to shove, it's always Louis's list.
> Unsub me.

It always has to be Louis’ list, because he’s incapable of functioning in a 
broader mileu over a sustained period of time. He would be quickly chewed up in 
a trade union, workers’ party or other mass organization where his belligerent 
egotism would not be tolerated for very long. And he claims to be building an 
inclusive, non-sectarian left in the USA! How preposterously self-deluding can 
you get?

I thought the exchange between Creegan and Karadjis was thoughtful and 
respectful on both sides. I’ve had my differences with both of them and others 
on the list over the past decade, but would happily call them comrades and 
function collectively with them in the same party. Not so Proyect, whose first 
instinct is to denounce. Most recently, he’s had the colossal gall to denounce 
those who have not followed him across the aisle to the austerian side as 
ideological purists and wild-eyed proponents of a new revolutionary 
international. I hope I’m wrong, but this is the kind of language I associate 
with those embarking, without fully realizing it, on that well-trodden path of 
many former leftists.

I can’t abide petty martinets. For all its merits and the presence of good, 
serious people who subscribe to it, leaving this iist is not, after all, like 
leaving the old mass parties of the left. Unsub me also.


> 
> On Sat, Jul 18, 2015 at 4:13 PM, Louis Proyect  wrote:
> 
>> On 7/18/15 4:00 PM, Andrew Pollack wrote:
>> 
>>> You're booting Jim for doing class analysis?
>>> That's fucked up.
>>> To be precise, that's Stalinism.
>>> 
>>> 
>> No, it's not. This is not a party. I don't collect dues or ask people to
>> sell a stupid newspaper at plant gates 6am in the morning.
>> 
>> It is a mailing list that I have the right to edit, to create boundaries
>> around just like any other publication, print or electronic. I don't tend
>> to remove people from the list unless I decide that their purpose here is
>> only to do "class analysis" as you put it. I had 11 years of this kind of
>> "class analysis" in the Trotskyist movement and that was enough for me. If
>> anybody wants to set up a mailing list where you can blather on about the
>> petty-bourgeoisie, contact me privately and I'll help you get started.
>> 
>> This list has been around for 17 years and has over 1500 subscribers. If
>> there's one thing I've learned over the years, it is that is not the place
>> to do Leon Trotsky imitations. Here's a reminder from the Marxmail website
>> subscription page for anybody tempted to repeat the Cannon-Shachtman debate:
>> 
>> MODERATION PRINCIPLES: The Marxism mailing list is extremely permissive.
>> There are a couple of things that are frowned upon strongly. If you come to
>> the list with the attitude that you are a true Bolshevik, who needs to
>> convert 'Mensheviks' to your beliefs, you will be unsubbed. Members of
>> self-declared vanguard parties who can adjust to the tolerant atmosphere of
>> the list are more than welcome, since they usually bring with them years of
>> Marxist study and political experience.
>> 
>> 
> _
> Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
> Set your options at: 
> http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/marvgand2%40gmail.com


_
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] The moderator's note

[michael a. lebowitz 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 the moderator has done by unsubbing Creegan for his posts is also 
to exclude the possibility of reading thoughtful responses such as that 
of Michael Karadjis. The effect is to turn the list into one of singing 
to the choirmaster.

michael
_
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] Moderator's note

[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 7/18/15 4:27 PM, aaron s. amaral via Marxism wrote:

"the tolerant atmosphere of the list"lmao


From an ISO member, no less.

Aaron, you will find a lot more POV's represented here than in the pages 
of your newspaper or at one of your conferences


Furthermore, there were more ISO'ers who got the boot in the last two 
years from your group than were unsubbed from this mailing list over the 
past ten. So put that in your pipe and smoke it.

_
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] Moderators note

[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.
*


Louis Proyect said (in part)
MODERATION PRINCIPLES: The Marxism mailing list is extremely permissive. 
There are a couple of things that are frowned upon strongly. If you come 
to the list with the attitude that you are a true Bolshevik, who needs 
to convert 'Mensheviks' to your beliefs, you will be unsubbed. Members 
of self-declared vanguard parties who can adjust to the tolerant 
atmosphere of the list are more than welcome, since they usually bring 
with them years of Marxist study and political experience.

Ken Hiebert replies:
I confess i had not read the principles and I have to admit that with such a 
principle you are within your rights to unsub James Creegan.  But I do find 
such a rule highly subjective.  And I think that many of us have firmly held 
views that we bring to this list and we are anxious to convince others of our 
views.
Were James Creegan's views class analysis as Andrew suggests?  I am not 
convinced of that. They could also be seen as a kind of slagging common in some 
left groups.
But, if I have anything to say about it, I would suggest that you do not unsub 
James Creegan.


_
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] Moderator's note

[aaron s. amaral 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 tolerant atmosphere of the list"lmao

On Sat, Jul 18, 2015 at 4:18 PM, Andrew Pollack via Marxism <
marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu> wrote:

>   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.
> *
>
> When push comes to shove, it's always Louis's list.
> Unsub me.
>
> On Sat, Jul 18, 2015 at 4:13 PM, Louis Proyect  wrote:
>
> > On 7/18/15 4:00 PM, Andrew Pollack wrote:
> >
> >> You're booting Jim for doing class analysis?
> >> That's fucked up.
> >> To be precise, that's Stalinism.
> >>
> >>
> > No, it's not. This is not a party. I don't collect dues or ask people to
> > sell a stupid newspaper at plant gates 6am in the morning.
> >
> > It is a mailing list that I have the right to edit, to create boundaries
> > around just like any other publication, print or electronic. I don't tend
> > to remove people from the list unless I decide that their purpose here is
> > only to do "class analysis" as you put it. I had 11 years of this kind of
> > "class analysis" in the Trotskyist movement and that was enough for me.
> If
> > anybody wants to set up a mailing list where you can blather on about the
> > petty-bourgeoisie, contact me privately and I'll help you get started.
> >
> > This list has been around for 17 years and has over 1500 subscribers. If
> > there's one thing I've learned over the years, it is that is not the
> place
> > to do Leon Trotsky imitations. Here's a reminder from the Marxmail
> website
> > subscription page for anybody tempted to repeat the Cannon-Shachtman
> debate:
> >
> > MODERATION PRINCIPLES: The Marxism mailing list is extremely permissive.
> > There are a couple of things that are frowned upon strongly. If you come
> to
> > the list with the attitude that you are a true Bolshevik, who needs to
> > convert 'Mensheviks' to your beliefs, you will be unsubbed. Members of
> > self-declared vanguard parties who can adjust to the tolerant atmosphere
> of
> > the list are more than welcome, since they usually bring with them years
> of
> > Marxist study and political experience.
> >
> >
> _
> Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
> Set your options at:
> http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/amaral1871%40gmail.com
>



-- 


 Seek for food and clothing first, then
the Kingdom of God shall be added unto you.
   Hegel, 1807

  The class struggle, which is always present to a historian influenced by
Marx, is a fight for the crude and material things without which no refined
and spiritual things could exist. Nevertheless, it is not in the form of
the spoils which fall to the victor that the latter make their presence
felt in the class struggle. They manifest themselves in this struggle as
courage, humor, cunning, and fortitude. They have retroactive force and
will constantly call in question every victory, past and present, of the
rulers. As flowers turn toward the sun, by dint of a secret heliotropism
the past strives to turn toward that sun which is rising in the sky of
history. A historical materialist must be aware of this most inconspicuous
of all transformations.

-Walter Benjamin, Spring, 1940

NYCSOCIALIST.ORG
_
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] Moderator's note

[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.
*

When push comes to shove, it's always Louis's list.
Unsub me.

On Sat, Jul 18, 2015 at 4:13 PM, Louis Proyect  wrote:

> On 7/18/15 4:00 PM, Andrew Pollack wrote:
>
>> You're booting Jim for doing class analysis?
>> That's fucked up.
>> To be precise, that's Stalinism.
>>
>>
> No, it's not. This is not a party. I don't collect dues or ask people to
> sell a stupid newspaper at plant gates 6am in the morning.
>
> It is a mailing list that I have the right to edit, to create boundaries
> around just like any other publication, print or electronic. I don't tend
> to remove people from the list unless I decide that their purpose here is
> only to do "class analysis" as you put it. I had 11 years of this kind of
> "class analysis" in the Trotskyist movement and that was enough for me. If
> anybody wants to set up a mailing list where you can blather on about the
> petty-bourgeoisie, contact me privately and I'll help you get started.
>
> This list has been around for 17 years and has over 1500 subscribers. If
> there's one thing I've learned over the years, it is that is not the place
> to do Leon Trotsky imitations. Here's a reminder from the Marxmail website
> subscription page for anybody tempted to repeat the Cannon-Shachtman debate:
>
> MODERATION PRINCIPLES: The Marxism mailing list is extremely permissive.
> There are a couple of things that are frowned upon strongly. If you come to
> the list with the attitude that you are a true Bolshevik, who needs to
> convert 'Mensheviks' to your beliefs, you will be unsubbed. Members of
> self-declared vanguard parties who can adjust to the tolerant atmosphere of
> the list are more than welcome, since they usually bring with them years of
> Marxist study and political experience.
>
>
_
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] Socialist Alliance statement: Greece: This is a coup cancel the debt!

[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 7/18/15 4:10 PM, Andrew Pollack via Marxism wrote:

And that's because, after all (hold onto your hat, Louis), Synapsismos is a
PETTY BOURGEOIS trend in the workers' movement.


Another key element of Trotskyist sectarianism is its tendency to turn 
every serious political fight into a conflict between worker and 
petty-bourgeoisie. Every challenge to party orthodoxy, unless the party 
leader himself mounts it, represents the influence of alien class 
influences into the proletarian vanguard. Every Trotskyist party in 
history has suffered from this crude sociological reductionism, but the 
American Trotskyists were the unchallenged masters of it.


Soon after the split from the SP and the formation of the Socialist 
Workers Party, a fight broke out in the party over the character of the 
Soviet Union. Max Shachtman, Martin Abern and James Burnham led one 
faction based primarily in New York. It stated that the Soviet Union was 
no longer a worker's state and it saw the economic system there as being 
in no way superior to capitalism. This opposition also seemed to be less 
willing to oppose US entry into WWII than the Cannon group, which stood 
on Zimmerwald "defeatist" orthodoxy.


Shachtman and Abern were full-time party workers with backgrounds 
similar to Cannon's. Burnham was a horse of a different color. He was an 
NYU philosophy professor who was born with a silver spoon in his mouth. 
He reputedly would show up at party meetings in top hat and tails, since 
he was often on the way to the opera.


Burnham became the paradigm of the whole opposition, despite the fact 
that Shachtman and Abern's family backgrounds were identical to 
Cannon's. Cannon and Trotsky tarred the whole opposition with the 
petty-bourgeois brush. They stated that the workers would resist war 
while the petty-bourgeois would welcome it. It was the immense pressure 
of the petty-bourgeois intelligentsia outside the SWP that served as a 
source for these alien class influences. Burnham was the "Typhoid Mary" 
of these petty-bourgeois germs.


However, it is simply wrong to set up a dichotomy between some kind of 
intrinsically proletarian opposition to imperialist war and 
petty-bourgeois acceptance of it. The workers have shown themselves just 
as capable of bending to imperialist war propaganda as events 
surrounding the Gulf War show. The primarily petty-bourgeois based 
antiwar movement helped the Vietnamese achieve victory. It was not coal 
miners or steel workers who provided the shock-troops for the Central 
America solidarity movement of the 1980's. It was lawyers, doctors, 
computer programmers, Maryknoll nuns, and aspiring circus clowns like 
the martyred Ben Linder who did.


full: http://www.columbia.edu/~lnp3/mydocs/organization/lenin_in_context.htm
_
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] Moderator's note

[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 7/18/15 4:00 PM, Andrew Pollack wrote:

You're booting Jim for doing class analysis?
That's fucked up.
To be precise, that's Stalinism.



No, it's not. This is not a party. I don't collect dues or ask people to 
sell a stupid newspaper at plant gates 6am in the morning.


It is a mailing list that I have the right to edit, to create boundaries 
around just like any other publication, print or electronic. I don't 
tend to remove people from the list unless I decide that their purpose 
here is only to do "class analysis" as you put it. I had 11 years of 
this kind of "class analysis" in the Trotskyist movement and that was 
enough for me. If anybody wants to set up a mailing list where you can 
blather on about the petty-bourgeoisie, contact me privately and I'll 
help you get started.


This list has been around for 17 years and has over 1500 subscribers. If 
there's one thing I've learned over the years, it is that is not the 
place to do Leon Trotsky imitations. Here's a reminder from the Marxmail 
website subscription page for anybody tempted to repeat the 
Cannon-Shachtman debate:


MODERATION PRINCIPLES: The Marxism mailing list is extremely permissive. 
There are a couple of things that are frowned upon strongly. If you come 
to the list with the attitude that you are a true Bolshevik, who needs 
to convert 'Mensheviks' to your beliefs, you will be unsubbed. Members 
of self-declared vanguard parties who can adjust to the tolerant 
atmosphere of the list are more than welcome, since they usually bring 
with them years of Marxist study and political experience.


_
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] Socialist Alliance statement: Greece: This is a coup cancel the debt!

[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.
*

I couldn't agree more with Jim.
Tsipras's main sin was his refusal to tell the truth. Nobody compelled
Syriza to take office with right-wing partners. They could have said: "we
have only a plurality, a plurality we will use only to fight austerity.
Which means you, the Greek workers, must continue to lead the fight outside
Parliament against austerity regardless of whether we continue to hold the
executive offices of this government."
But he wouldn't do that because he, and the most weighty wing of Syria, are
still Eurocommunists, and believed that holding those offices was key to
getting a little slack from the bankers.
And that's because, after all (hold onto your hat, Louis), Synapsismos is a
PETTY BOURGEOIS trend in the workers' movement.
See
http://www.ernestmandel.org/en/works/txt/1979/a_critique_of_eurocommunism.htm


On Sat, Jul 18, 2015 at 11:55 AM, James Creegan via Marxism <
marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu> wrote:

>   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.
> *
>
> Your reply was thoughtful and, a welcome relief from the rank
> TINA-inspired apologetics of some people on this list serve and elsewhere.
> So let me try to answer in a thoughtful way.
>
> You seem to accept all the substantive criticisms I make of the Tsipras
> leadership, and agree that they were not compelled to do what they
> did, but want to characterize the their failure as a mistake as opposed to
> a betrayal. But my use of the word "betrayal" is more than mere indignation
> and venting. There is an important political reason why I employ the term.
>
> If it was obvious to me that the attitude of the Troika would be more or
> less what it turned out to be before negotiations even began (and I am no
> genius), why did it never seem to occur to the Syriza leadership, even as
> one possible outcome, to be taken into account and planned for ? It seems
> to me that more was involved here than an error in judgment. If, moreover,
> the leadership were now or at some point in the near future to hang their
> heads in shame and admit to their disastrous errors in response to
> criticism, I, in turn, would be inclined to accept your criticism of my
> harsh strictures. But let me venture another prediction: Tsipras and Co.
> will not admit the error of their ways in any criticism-self-criticism
> session of the Syriza Central Committee or  at any Party Congress. The same
> political predispositions that prevented them from entertaining the
> possibility of a Grexit in the first place will now impel them (no doubt
> with more hand-wringing) to defend the course they have chosen,  to
> continue upon it, and to defeat and perhaps expel those in their party who
> oppose it.
>
> I make this prediction because I think that the left-reformism you speak
> of, more than just a set of mistaken ideas, is closer to a class ideology
> based upon the position of middling layers (small business people,
> professionals of various kinds, union bureaucrats and party politicians) in
> capitalist society. And it is, unfortunately, these layers that are most
> prominent in the Western left today.
>
> The petty bourgeoisie (and the labor bureaucrats, who essentially share
> their outlook) are genuinely horrified by the ravages of neoliberal
> capitalism, but not to the point where they are willing to contemplate a
> decisive break with bourgeois institutions or determined popular struggle
> against them. Their in-between class position makes them too close to
> the big bourgeoisie to entertain any "extremist" solutions that might put
> their own social status in peril. And their social position also dictates
> their choice of means. They think they can abate the horrors of
> neoliberalism through shrewdness, game-theory based strategies, clever
> negotiating tactics and appeals to the humanity of the ruling classes, to
> whom they feel a certain kinship when all is said and done. The prospect of
> all-out class struggle fills them with foreboding and dread. They
> will always capitulate before embarking on that path.
>
> Having said that, I should also add that it is hardly enough just to say
> it. The left and the working class must be convinced that what I have said
> is true. But to do that will require political realignment, which will in
> turn necessitate a hard factional struggle against committed reformists who
> have no intention (apart from perhaps a few well-mo

Re: [Marxism] Moderator's note

[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.
*

You're booting Jim for doing class analysis?
That's fucked up.
To be precise, that's Stalinism.

On Sat, Jul 18, 2015 at 3:18 PM, Louis Proyect via Marxism <
marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu> wrote:

>   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 7/18/15 11:55 AM, James Creegan via Marxism wrote:
>
>> I make this prediction because I think that the left-reformism you speak
>> of, more than just a set of mistaken ideas, is closer to a class ideology
>> based upon the position of middling layers (small business people,
>> professionals of various kinds, union bureaucrats and party politicians)
>> in
>> capitalist society. And it is, unfortunately, these layers that are most
>> prominent in the Western left today.
>>
>
>
> Let Jim Creegan play "scratch to gangrene" somewhere else. I really don't
> listen to someone play-act Leon Trotsky versus James Burnham here. He is
> getting the boot.
> _
> Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
> Set your options at:
> http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/acpollack2%40gmail.com
>
_
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] Moderator's note

[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 7/18/15 11:55 AM, James Creegan via Marxism wrote:

I make this prediction because I think that the left-reformism you speak
of, more than just a set of mistaken ideas, is closer to a class ideology
based upon the position of middling layers (small business people,
professionals of various kinds, union bureaucrats and party politicians) in
capitalist society. And it is, unfortunately, these layers that are most
prominent in the Western left today.



Let Jim Creegan play "scratch to gangrene" somewhere else. I really 
don't listen to someone play-act Leon Trotsky versus James Burnham here. 
He is getting the boot.

_
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] brilliant speech---Zoe Konstantopoulou [speaker of parliament, who appointed the debt commission]: Nο to ultimatums, Nο to the Memoranda of servitude

[michael a. lebowitz 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.analyzegreece.gr/topics/greece-europe/item/288-zoe-konstantopoulou-n-to-ultimatums-n-to-the-memoranda-of-servitude


 Zoe Konstantopoulou: Nο to ultimatums, Nο to the Memoranda of servitude



_
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] (Argentina) Where does the success of the FIT come from and what will be debated in the upcoming primary elections?

[Celeste Murillo 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.
*

Full article:
http://www.leftvoice.org/What-can-we-learn-from-the-electoral-alliance-of-Argentina-s-revolutionary-left-866

Argentina is one of the countries where the revolutionary left is
strongest. In the 2013 elections, the far left coalition "Left and Workers'
Front" obtained 1.2 million votes...

It
​ may be useful for those interested in the last decades of activites and
debates within the left in Argentina after the
 2001
​ crisis.
​
Saludos​
​,
Celeste​

---

The PTS undertook the often difficult and unseen work within the workers
movement and the industrial unions, taking advantage of the objective
re-strengthening of the working class. The PO, operating under the theory
that the subject was now the unemployed workers (the piqueteros) clung to
the unemployed movement while the party became weakened as a result of the
cooptation of piquetero leaders and the economic stabilization, which
allowed the unemployed to go back to work, although often in precarious
conditions.

With the international economic crisis that a serious blow to Argentina in
2009, the process of the development of the growing worker’s vanguard in
industry, took the front page, fighting back against massive layoffs. The
emblem of this struggle was the Kraft factory, which employed around 2,500
workers. The shop floor committee (comisión interna) had a minority
representation of the PTS, represented by Javier “Poke” Hermosilla, current
candidate for Deputy Governor on the PTS slate in the FIT primaries)

As a result of this conflict, a prolonged strike, which was defeated only
by repression and the eviction of the factory by the police, was broadcast
live by the major television channels, a workers vanguard, and with it, the
PTS made a leap forward on a never before seen scale.
_
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] Socialist Alliance statement: Greece: This is a coup cancel the debt!

[James Creegan 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.
*

Your reply was thoughtful and, a welcome relief from the rank
TINA-inspired apologetics of some people on this list serve and elsewhere.
So let me try to answer in a thoughtful way.

You seem to accept all the substantive criticisms I make of the Tsipras
leadership, and agree that they were not compelled to do what they
did, but want to characterize the their failure as a mistake as opposed to
a betrayal. But my use of the word "betrayal" is more than mere indignation
and venting. There is an important political reason why I employ the term.

If it was obvious to me that the attitude of the Troika would be more or
less what it turned out to be before negotiations even began (and I am no
genius), why did it never seem to occur to the Syriza leadership, even as
one possible outcome, to be taken into account and planned for ? It seems
to me that more was involved here than an error in judgment. If, moreover,
the leadership were now or at some point in the near future to hang their
heads in shame and admit to their disastrous errors in response to
criticism, I, in turn, would be inclined to accept your criticism of my
harsh strictures. But let me venture another prediction: Tsipras and Co.
will not admit the error of their ways in any criticism-self-criticism
session of the Syriza Central Committee or  at any Party Congress. The same
political predispositions that prevented them from entertaining the
possibility of a Grexit in the first place will now impel them (no doubt
with more hand-wringing) to defend the course they have chosen,  to
continue upon it, and to defeat and perhaps expel those in their party who
oppose it.

I make this prediction because I think that the left-reformism you speak
of, more than just a set of mistaken ideas, is closer to a class ideology
based upon the position of middling layers (small business people,
professionals of various kinds, union bureaucrats and party politicians) in
capitalist society. And it is, unfortunately, these layers that are most
prominent in the Western left today.

The petty bourgeoisie (and the labor bureaucrats, who essentially share
their outlook) are genuinely horrified by the ravages of neoliberal
capitalism, but not to the point where they are willing to contemplate a
decisive break with bourgeois institutions or determined popular struggle
against them. Their in-between class position makes them too close to
the big bourgeoisie to entertain any "extremist" solutions that might put
their own social status in peril. And their social position also dictates
their choice of means. They think they can abate the horrors of
neoliberalism through shrewdness, game-theory based strategies, clever
negotiating tactics and appeals to the humanity of the ruling classes, to
whom they feel a certain kinship when all is said and done. The prospect of
all-out class struggle fills them with foreboding and dread. They
will always capitulate before embarking on that path.

Having said that, I should also add that it is hardly enough just to say
it. The left and the working class must be convinced that what I have said
is true. But to do that will require political realignment, which will in
turn necessitate a hard factional struggle against committed reformists who
have no intention (apart from perhaps a few well-motivated radicals) of
abandoning the methods that reflect their class position. In the present
political juncture, I don't think what separates revolutionaries from
reformists is whether or not one calls for socialism. I think both
revolutionaries and reformists must now make demands which one can call
Keynesian. The fight must take place over the methods (class-struggle or
negotiations) for achieving those demands, and that class-struggle methods
could very well open the way to going beyond demands for relief measures.
But I think the fight for class-struggle methods in the left has to be a
hard one, leading to a clear political differentiation. I don't believe the
left-reformists in this fight are about to change their spots, and we must
be prepared for that as much as the left should have been prepared for the
Troika's hard line.

Jim Creegan

On Sat, Jul 18, 2015 at 9:04 AM, Michael Karadjis 
wrote:

>   *From:* James Creegan 
>  *Sent:* Saturday, July 18, 2015 4:25 AM
>  > I have had just about all can abide of statements to the effect that
> Tsipras and Co. were "forced" to capitulate or "beaten into submission".
> Were they forced to stand on a platform of ending austerity, knowing all
> the while that they would mitigate austerity only to the extent that the
> "institutions" found it acceptable?
>
> They had illusions that they could end au

[Marxism] You can watch the Lapavitsas exit talk directly [along with others]

[michael a. lebowitz 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.
*

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8vTTUcaYEWs
_
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] Gindin and Panitch: The Real Plan B: The New Greek Marathon

[Richard Fidler 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.
*

Here is my response to the article by Sam Gindin and Leo Panitch, which I
made yesterday on the Socialist Project listserve that includes them:

I agree with Sam and Leo that Syriza was correct to "enter the state" (i.e.
fight for government). That orientation, of course, had to be accompanied by
a strategy capable of countering austerity and achieving some real,
immediate benefits for the Greek people. Instead, they have ended up at this
stage with even worse austerity, and a government that is bound by a
parliamentary vote to enforce it.

I agree as well that one of the achievements of the last six months of
Syriza-led government was to "expose the neoliberal essence of the EU and to
generate discussions on what alternatives, however difficult to imagine,
might be." I would add that Syriza's resistance to the Troika has managed to
create divisions in the latter's components (the IMF memo, for example), to
create new sympathy for the plight of the Greeks in the European working
class, and to deepen popular lack of confidence in the Eurozone leaderships,
especially Germany, as offering any viable solution to the capitalist
crisis. However, it seems clear that an immediate Grexit is ruled out as an
alternative in the immediate future.

As to what Sam and Leo propose as a "Real Plan B," to prepare for an
eventual departure from the Eurozone, they offer some interesting
suggestions, starting (as we must) from what possiblities already exist
within Greece, if only in embryo. This includes building on the solidarity
networks, self-organized collectives, working with Solidarity for All, etc.
However, as they note, the Syriza government has done little to use the
state to sustain and broaden this movement. And how likely is it that a
Syriza government can impose conditions on purchasers of Greek state assets
(to the amount of 50 billion euros!) when the Troika on-site monitors will
be vetting every measure in advance, seeking only to get the most cash they
can for repayment of usurious, odious debts incurred by past neoliberal
governments?

Pursuing even these modest proposals, workable or not, would require a
change in culture in Syriza. How much latitude does this government have
now, forced as it is to implement the colonialist Troika conditions? Sam and
Leo write that the Syriza government "will need to concretely counter the
Troika-imposed legislation." But proposing a "positive bill" for every
"negative bill" really begs the question, doesn't it?

Frankly, I find it hard to disagree with the conclusion of Eric Toussaint of
the Committee for the Abolition of Third World Debt, which was commissioned
by the Greek parliament to audit the country's debt and propose relief
measures. After summaring the Troika's draconian provisions, now endorsed by
the Greek Parliament, he writes (http://cadtm.org/Greece-Alternatives-to-the
):
 
"Contrary to claims that in return for these detrimental concessions Greece
will get three years of respite and will significantly boost its economic
activity, it will in fact be impossible to create the primary fiscal surplus
announced in the plan considering the continued check on household
purchasing power and public expenditure.

"Harmful consequences are inevitable: in a few months or early next year at
the latest, creditors will attack the Greek authorities for failing to
comply with their commitments in terms of primary fiscal surplus and will
introduce new demands. Neither the Greek people nor their government will
have any respite. The creditors will threaten to bring the promised
disbursements to a halt if new austerity measures are not implemented. The
Greek authorities will be caught up in a spiral of concessions."

Toussaint's analysis of the recent events, and his suggested "Alternatives
to the Capitulation," bear careful reading, in my view. Many of the
proposals may be moot now, given the parliamentary vote, but some -- for
example, taking control of the Greek banking system (it was always a mystery
to me why the government failed to do this in recent months; Toussaint
thinks this is still possible) -- they are an important contribution to the
discussion now unfolding both in Greece (as Sam and Leo report) and
internationally on what an anti-austerity alternative government strategy
can entail in a European country like Greece.

Richard



_
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] Gindin and Panitch: The Real Plan B: The New Greek Marathon

[Hans G Ehrbar 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.socialistproject.ca/bullet/1145.php

*The  B u l l e t**
**Socialist Project E-Bulletin No. 1145**
**July 17, 2015*

The Real Plan B: The New Greek Marathon

Sam Gindin and Leo Panitch

In the face of being excluded from desperately needed funds and the threat
of being kicked out of the European Union, the Greek parliament has now
voted to accept the Troika memorandum
.
The Greek Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras acknowledged - unlike social
democrats *choosing* to implement neoliberalism as part of their
'modernization' - that this was 'a bad deal' forced on the Greeks. Syriza's
MPs were divided although three quarters of them followed Tsipras and voted
yes. Outside in Syntagma Square thousands of angry demonstrators gathered
and then marched through downtown Athens, this time the 'NO' being reserved
for rejecting the memorandum. There is a strong current of dissent in the
Syriza party Central Committee, which has yet to meet. Yet there is also a
general sense we get from party members and supporters at all levels we
have talked with here that the government should be supported and continue
in office.

In the face of these divisions and frustrations, what if anything might be
done to revive and continue Syriza's struggle against neoliberalism? And
since neoliberalism is what capitalism *is* today - there is no other kind
- what can be done to lay the basis for ending capitalism? This is not just
a question for Greeks, though crucial aspects of this dilemma are of course
specific to Greece, but for how the left everywhere thinks about and
responds to the challenges of coming to power in a hostile environment to
try to protect people from the worst depredations of neoliberalism, and
tries to embark on 'really-existing transitions' to a more egalitarian,
solidaristic, substantively more democratic world.

Sections of the Greek left and a good part of the international left have
argued that the deal should have been rejected, and Grexit embraced
instead. This opens up a number of scenarios but the most likely would be
the government resigning, calling new elections, and Syriza running on a
program that reversed its former support for staying in the eurozone.
Whether or not the party would win, its credibility would, according to
this argument, be maintained and it would at least live to fight another
day.

Exiting the Euro, Leaving the State

We would not dismiss the above argument out of hand. It reflects legitimate
emotional sentiments and strategic orientations. Until recently, however,
three of four Greeks opposed Grexit, and even if this has shifted
dramatically with the referendum and its aftermath, there is no clear and
deep consensus on leaving. Tsipras and a good part of the leadership is, in
this regard, not simply 'tailing' the public but deeply committed to Europe
on both economic and cultural grounds. For those of us who have long argued
that eventual exit is essential, especially from a socialist perspective,
the challenge is not so much to condemn this but to ask: When is the right
moment to take this on? What practical steps, ideological and in terms of
state capacities, might be argued for now to move the party and its base
toward a consensus?

As for counselling Syriza to risk losing its governing status, it needs to
be noted that Syriza already faced this question in the run up to the 2012
elections, and concluded that the responsible decision was to enter the
state and do everything it could to restrain the neoliberal assault from
*within* the state. Its electoral breakthrough that year was based on
Tsipras's declaration that Syriza was not just campaigning to register a
higher percentage of the vote but determined to form a government with any
others who would join with it in stopping the economic torture while
remaining within Europe. It was only when it came close to winning on this
basis, that Syriza vaulted to the forefront of the international left's
attention, and by the following summer, Tsipras was chosen by the European
Left Parties to lead their campaign in the 2014 European Parliament
elections. Syriza's subsequent clear victory in Greece in this election
foretold its victory in the Greek national election of January 2015, when
it became the first and only one of all the European left parties to
challenge neoliberalism and win national office.

Even apart from the humanitarian measures it immediately introduced without
allowing the Troika's representatives to vet the legislation, the very
attempt by the new government to challenge the Troika has helped expose 

Re: [Marxism] Socialist Alliance statement: Greece: This is a coup cancel the debt!

[Michael Karadjis 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.
*

From: James Creegan 
Sent: Saturday, July 18, 2015 4:25 AM
> I have had just about all can abide of statements to the effect that Tsipras 
> and Co. were "forced" to capitulate or "beaten into submission". Were they 
> forced to stand on a platform of ending austerity, knowing all the while that 
> they would mitigate austerity only to the extent that the "institutions" 
> found it acceptable? 

They had illusions that they could end austerity, or at least mitigate it to a 
great extent, while staying in the eurozone. These were left-reformist 
illusions. At the same time, they also believed their mandate was to end 
austerity but to try to stay in the eurozone, as that is what most polls seemed 
to indicate was the view of those who elected them. They therefore put up a 
5-month battle to try do the impossible. It is hard to fault them for trying, 
and most give them the credit for fighting hard for most of that time. 

Aside from illusions, it is also possible that they expected some kind of 
moblisation of solidarity among working people in Europe to pressure their 
governments. The fact that this barely occurred at all is, in my opinion, a 
useful thing to discuss the meaning of.

But I agree that in the end this was impossible. But having consistent 
illusions, and fighting as hard as they could within that framework – and what 
they saw as impossible alternatives – is different to “betraying”. 

I didn’t say they were “forced,” but “beaten into submission” is a good 
description of what went on. The reports spoke of Tsipras alone and sleepless 
being badgered hour after hour by Eurocats taking turns, a process likened to 
“mental waterboarding,” while being presented with the alternative of a total 
cut-off of ECB funds and a disorderly unprepared grexit. 

I definitely don’t support Tsipras’ decision and from the outset of this 
discussion I have said my sympathies all along have been with the Syriza Left 
Platform. But that doesn’t stop me from recognising that he was forced to make 
a decision between arsenic and cyanide at that moment, and as I wouldn’t like 
to be in that position, I see it as futile calling people that are traitors. 
Note that even in her fantastic speech to parliament rejecting Tsipras’ 
capitulation, Zoe Konstantinopoulou used the kindest words about Tsipras 
himself and the unequal struggle he had confronted 
(http://www.analyzegreece.gr/topics/greece-europe/item/288-zoe-konstantopoulou-n-to-ultimatums-n-to-the-memoranda-of-servitude)
 while voting against him:

“The prime minister spoke with
honesty, bravery, boldness and selflessness. He is the youngest of all
Greek prime ministers and he has fought as much as any of his
predecessors for the democratic and social rights of the people and of
the younger generations. He represented and represents our generation,
and he gives us hope. I honor him and will always honor him for this
stand and this choice.

“And at the same time, I consider it my binding responsibility, as
president of the parliament, not to close my eyes or to pretend that I
do not understand blackmail. I cannot make it easy. I could never vote
for and legalize the content of this agreement. I think the same is true and 
would apply to the Prime Minister, who is
today blackmailed with a weapon threatening the survival of his people.”


> Were they "forced" to oppose in their central committee Left Platform 
> Resolutions calling for a  Plan B, and greater emphasis on mass mobilization? 

No, they were not forced. This was their error all along, as I wrote here the 
first day of this latest discussion. The lack of a Plan B was due to their 
“Europeanist” politics. There ahs been much discussion on this list of whether 
preparing a Plan B within that time frame would have made any difference or is 
even feasible. That is a useful, real world discussion to be having. It is much 
more useful than denouncing betrayers, however fulfilling you find the latter. 
But yes, IMO, not having developed any Plan B along the way did make theor 
choices at the end of the process much more stark.

> Were they "forced" to call a referendum, attempt to surrender to the Troika 
> before it was even held, and then do exactly what the voters overwhelmingly 
> rejected? 

No. The move you refer to just before the referendum, and just after, were 
disastrous, inexplicable errors of Tsipras. They make no sense. I think by then 
he was defeated.

> Are they now being "forced" to ram an austerity bill through parliament and 
> act as accomplices to the Troika in driving their people deeper into poverty 
> and national humiliation? 

Not sure about the continual quote marks 

[Marxism] Solidarity

[ioannis aposperites 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.
*

This is an appeal for international solidarity for the arrested 
militants. More at http://www.okde.org/~okde8395/index.php/en/


and at https://www.facebook.com/groups/47967013576/

"SEND MESSAGES OF SUPPORT TO THE GREEK ANTI-AUSTERITY PROTESTERS
as you know Greece has been for the last 5 years in the forefront of the 
class struggle due to the unprecedented neoliberal attack on the working 
class.
Recently, the left reformist party of SYRIZA capitulated to the European 
capital despite the resistance of the working class.
This capitulation has been met with a new wave of protests and 
resistance on behalf of the anti-capitalist left and the genuine 
revolutionary forces of the left.
On Wednesday in Syndagma Square the SYRIZA riot police attacked our 
block and arrested two of our comrades of OKDE-Spartakos (Greek section 
of the 4th International) and of Antarsya along with 13 others.

All of them have been badly beaten while in police custody.
They are awaiting trail on 22nd July under false charges.
We have waged a worldwide campaign collecting signatures of academics 
and trade unionists in support of our comrades (both of them trade 
unionists, one of them the president of the union of bookshop workers) 
to present them in court. Your support is vital to save these militants 
from being in jail.
Please forward your name, surname and affiliation to Gianna Katsiampoura 
: https://www.facebook.com/gianna.katsiampoura  if you want to support 
this campaign"


JA
_
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