File spoon-archives/marxism-general.archive/marxism-general_1997/marxism-general.9705, message 93


Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 08:41:16 +0200 (MET DST)
To: marxism-general-AT-jefferson.village.Virginia.EDU
From: rolf.martens-AT-mailbox.swipnet.se (Rolf Martens)
Subject: Re: M-G: Rolf the Lunatic!


Rob wrote, on 28.05:


>Rolf before you go on some insane tangent, you should count to ten. 
>Calling me and other "trots" ideological faggots?  How is that an
>esteemed communist like yourself could use such blatantly prejudiced and
>derrogatory language? 

Well, this is called "tat for tit". see your next sentence.

>My question about Mao's sexual life was in no way
>meant as an insult to you idol and demagogue, but an honest question. 

Was it really a question? In that case, here's a straight (NB)
answer: No, Mao wasn't a "prevert" at all, any such allegations
are due to the bourgeoisie's being ideologically finished and
just trying to find something to hit their opponents with.

See, for instance, your own subject line.

As Mao himself has said (approximately), when you see such
subject lines, that's an indication that you (no, not you but
I) am/are on the right track. 

>You get so hot headed!  Communism, even STALINISM I feel is more
>progressive than Afghan fundamentalism, that's in essence why we defend
>the SU's actions in Afghanistan. 

Did you miss my last posting?

Those *attacking* Stalin (the Soviet revisionists) were the
aggressors in Afghanistan. Those defending him (in the main)
were those who condemnded the aggression.

>I don't give a shit what you think the
>leaders of the SU "really meant", it's what they were doing that really
>counts. 

Precisely. Mass murder in Agfhanistan. Destruction of thousands
of villages. The sowing of tens of millions of mines, which
still today claim hundreds of lives every year. Those are the
actions that you're defending.

>We had to defend the more progressive society.  So you, as a
>communist would promote the overthrow of a degenerated workers state and
>substitute it with the repressive ideas of fundamentalists.  Wow, that
>would be interesting wouldn't it.  All in the name of freedom, "oppess
>the woman...."

The Soviet Union of Brezhnev was a *fascist* state. *This* was
one importnat thing that Mao pointed out. It's an old trick,
discguising fascism as "socialism". Hitler did it too: "national
socialism", that what nazism is short for.

>
>Comradely
>
>
>Rob

"Comradely", to people like you - even if possibly mainly
misled and deceived - no. You standpoint is revisionist,
bourgeois, very reactionary. 

Should people cooly or hotheadedly combat those enormous
crimes of social-imperialism which you're defending? That's
their choice.

Rolf M.



     --- from list marxism-general-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---

   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005