Leonardo Kosloff wrote:
* when I say distributionist, I'm referring, daring as I am, to Marx's
Critique of the Gotha Programme:
Vulgar socialism (and from it in turn a section of the democrats) has taken
over from the bourgeois economists the consideration and treatment of
distribution
Louis Proyect wrote: My main disagreement with Nestor is his tendency to apply
such examples
to Iran, China or other countries with nominally anti-imperialist
governments but at least he errs on the side of living reality rather
than quote-mongering from Marx.
Well, Louis, as always, I
Leonardo Kosloff wrote:
But I’m starting to notice here, that Néstor and I perhaps started with the
left foot, so given the circumstances which I’m starting to feel out, and as
I take it, that he is man of struggle, I’ll try to keep the quotes to a
minimum, or just plagiarize them.
Take a
Yes, perhaps we started on the wrong foot.
I have never suggested that the transitional period should be capitalist
just because it has to carry to end tasks that the bourgeoisie cannot
take to their fulfillment.
And, Leonardo, though I am no Peronist, not at all, I am still further
from
True enough. The way I started was stupidly insensitive, careless, perhaps I’m
rubbing the crap from other lists, environments, etc., perhaps Louis, putting
it in nationalists terms now, or at least those of my barrio, Saavedra, this is
an all too common, but bad, habit for us Argentines, or
Néstor Gorojovsky wrote:
The day you overcome your liberal-progressive worship of those
national movements that, in fact, seek to destroy larger national
movements that tend to supersede imperialist domination, that day, you
will begin to understand something in this terrain.
In the
2009/9/5 Lüko Willms lueko.wil...@t-online.de:
S. Artesian (sartes...@earthlink.net) wrote on 2009-09-04 at 10:59:55 in
about Re: [Marxism] Voting with feet, not commendable in Argentina Re:
China's high speed rail plans,:
And what is that issue? Let's review, according to LW and Nestor,
No, that was NOT my answer. I did not say that imperialism makes it a
class question.
I say that the national question is always a class question.
Which, of course, you will disagree with. In deeper or shallower conversation.
What can I do.
At least there are a couple of people who disagree
NG wrote: Really, S. Artesian, neither did I suggest this that you think
I suggested
Really Nestor, what I stated is based on your statements and LW's.
LW said explicitly that both the proletariat and the bourgeoisie were being
made stronger in China. The Chinese nation is being made
Here's what you wrote:
A national issue is, by definition, a class issue.
The national question is a class question.
Imperialism 101, dear Artesian.
_
Seems clear to me that since the first 2 lessons are based on your
introductory knowledge of imperialism, that imperialism is the
I don{t know who is Olga Korbut. If the intention is derogative, que
te recontra por las dudas.
And yes, imperialism is the determinant factor, as you put it.
2009/9/5 S. Artesian sartes...@earthlink.net:
Here's what you wrote:
A national issue is, by definition, a class issue.
The national
On Sep 5, 2009, at 9:53 AM, Néstor Gorojovsky wrote:
...I say that the national question is always a class question...
At least there are...people who..agree with me... Marx...among others!
As illustrated by Marx's view of the national question among that
ethnic garbage, the southern
Nestor,
You felt you were informed enough to agree with LW that China is using its
export earnings to provide the stimulus to its economy when there is no
evidence that export earnings have been so directed
You felt you were informed enough to state that the whole thing [by which
I think you
Marx´s Eurocentric mistakes only show him as a man of his times. He
was no God, he was an European of the 29th Century. The best of all
them, but one of them.
Marx´s understanding of the national question, if you are interested
in learning from it, can be read in Bloom´s A world of nations,
among
On Sep 5, 2009, at 11:01 PM, Néstor Gorojovsky wrote:
We Marxists, by the way, only support national movements that forward
the march towards socialism. Not every such movement does it.
So. All hail whatever Marxist Pope has decreed infallibly to his
elect exactly which proletarian nations
A national issue is, by definition, a class issue.
The national question is a class question.
Imperialism 101, dear Artesian.
Of course there are lots of class analyses to be made on the national
question, and related issues.
The first and foremost being what bloc of classes will succesfully
Sorry, I was thinking in Argentinean parliamentary terms.
Voting with the feet, here, means leaving the Hemicycle so that
the numbers fall below the minimum required to vote a law. Voting
with the ass means remaining at one´s seat even though one does not
favor a law, but at least provides the
S. Artesian (sartes...@earthlink.net) wrote on 2009-09-04 at 10:59:55 in
about Re: [Marxism] Voting with feet, not commendable in Argentina Re:
China's high speed rail plans,:
And what is that issue? Let's review, according to LW and Nestor, the CCP
is not bowing down to capitalism, it
Leonardo Kosloff (holmof...@hotmail.com) wrote on 2009-09-04 at 13:14:26
in about [Marxism] Voting with feet, not commendable in Argentina Re:
China's high speed rail plans, :
@Nestor: Well, then, what makes you think that the Chinese bureaucracy
won't betray the interests of workers,
Lüko Willms escribió:
Sitting e.g. in the parliament of Argentina, one would be confronted with
such questions: should the high-speed line from Buenos Aires to Rosario and
Cordoba be built? Should Argentina import used locomotives and wagons from
Spain? Should the country enhance the
20 matches
Mail list logo
