Anthony Boynton's detailed look at the context in which the BPP
emerged is very important. In reading David Hilliard's autobiography
recently I was struck by how many times, before, during and after his
Panther days, he got jobs on the docks and later became a union
organizer. The point being the
On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 10:04 AM, Andrew Pollack acpolla...@gmail.comwrote:
That absence of the Old Left was also striking when reading the
countless times he (and other Panthers in their autobiographies) say
we couldn't have known, we never expected, etc., the kind of
COINTELPRO dirty tricks
I believe I posted to this effect a few months ago.
Lefto opportunism or Ultra-Left is characterized by an overestimation of
the strength of capital, an under-estimation of the strength of the
working class. Using this description, I see the most destructive
ultra-leftism of the '60s to have been
Carroll wrote: History never repeats itself, and the only lesson it teaches
is the
lesson that nothing is to be learned from it.
So what a fool Marx was to actually study history. What a waste of time
Trotsky's History of the Russian Revolution is. All hail Henry Ford.
History is bunk.
And what struck me was how in the process how little time was devoted to
exposing the crimes of Franco and fascism with the onus therefor being shifted
to the Stalinists, many of whom were victims of fascist repression, arguments
recycled and coopted constantly by neo-cons, ex-trot or not:
In a message dated 11/8/2009 11:50:43 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
_anthony.boyn...@gmail.com_ (mailto:anthony.boyn...@gmail.com) writes:
The Black Panther Party failed, just like the SWP, the CP, and just like
every other would-be wannabe revolutionary party in the history of the USA.
I was wondering when comrade Melyn/Waistline woud enter into the discussion,
and I'm glad he did.
Nobody is NOT defending the Panthers, but defense does not imply, include,
require uncritical allegiance. The Panthers after all have a history, a
history of their rise and fall, and that history
S. Artesian wrote:
Somewhere along the line, real history has to be apprehended, criticized,
captured so we can maybe avoid repeating the same old same old one more same
old time.
Exactly.
We all hail Che Guevara as an exemplary revolutionary, but the Bolivian
mission was doomed from the
Louis, I can understand why from this vantage-point one can consider the
founding of the Fourth International a sectarian mistake. However, at the
time that Trotsky proposed it, Stalinism was not only a mass movement in the
working class throughout the world, it was capable of any kind of crime
Thomas Bias writes:
The Fourth International was launched to combat Stalinism and social
democracy in the working class, with the belief that without doing so
socialist revolution was not possible.
It's a little more complicated than that. The Trotskyists
10 matches
Mail list logo
