Jim: You cannot be serious. You are
really saying that the American working class is *essentially* pro-imperialist!
Talk about being ensnared in surface appearances. You seem indifferent to the
spectacular assault on the living standards of the working class in the
nineties. Presumably these
>>> Jim heartfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 05/13/00 02:26AM >>>
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Chris
Burford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>"Imperialism is as much our 'mortal' enemy as is capitalism. That is so. No
>Marxist will forget, however, that capitalism is progressive compared with
>feudal
In message <000201bfbe3d$65ad4540$95fe869f@oemcomputer>, George
Pennefather <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>
>George Pennefather: Facts always merits attention. However they
>must be analysed in the context of the establishment of the
>specific way in which they constitute a manifes
Jim Heartfield: Here George is
abusing the appearance-essence category by making it into a dogmatic insistence
on the correctness of his analysis even where it is contradicted by appearance.
No matter what the evidence is, he is saying, the essence is reactionary, so you
do not have to pay a
gt;
Sent: Sunday, May 14, 2000 8:10 PM
Subject: Re: M-TH: British intervention in Sierra Leone
>
> I'm grateful for George Pennefather's warm regards, as the rest of his
> post is decidedly chilly, but comradely criticism is always welcome.
>
> George chides me for my und
I'm grateful for George Pennefather's warm regards, as the rest of his
post is decidedly chilly, but comradely criticism is always welcome.
George chides me for my undialectical approach in insisting that there
are positive developments within capitalism, though the negative
predominate.
Of cou
Jim Heartfield: Progressive
imperialism? I have often been criticised for insisting on the persistence of
progressive trends within capitalism, such as the (intermittent) development of
productivity, but it would not have occurred to me to insist on the progressive
aspect of imperialism.As
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Chris
Burford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>"Imperialism is as much our 'mortal' enemy as is capitalism. That is so. No
>Marxist will forget, however, that capitalism is progressive compared with
>feudalism and that imperialism is progressive compared with pre-mono
At 08:43 12/05/00 +0100, you wrote:
>In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Chris
>Burford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>
> > What Jim is
> >opposing is any discrimination between the different actions of imperialist
> >powers as to which are progressive and which are not. This is childish
> >leftism, ridi
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Chris
Burford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
> What Jim is
>opposing is any discrimination between the different actions of imperialist
>powers as to which are progressive and which are not. This is childish
>leftism, ridiculed by Lenin.
Progressive imperialism? I
At 08:34 10/05/00 +0100, Jim heartfield wrote:
>In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Chris
>Burford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
> >IMO this particular British involvement is progressive and is part of the
> >developing process of world governance, so long as it assists the UN and
> >the West African pe
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Chris
Burford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>IMO this particular British involvement is progressive and is part of the
>developing process of world governance, so long as it assists the UN and
>the West African peace keeping force to re-organise. I say that, consciou
One of the ways the world could make reparations to Africa is by giving
support to the democratic resolution of its conflicts.
This Time article characteristically pinpoints a dilemma for western
capitalist governments.
> May 9, 2000
>
> By Tony Karon
>
>
13 matches
Mail list logo
