File spoon-archives/marxism-international.archive/marxism-international_1997/marxism-international.9709, message 311


Date: Tue, 16 Sep 1997 08:03:05 -0400 (EDT)
From: Andrew Wayne Austin <aaustin-AT-utkux.utcc.utk.edu>
Subject: RE: M-I: Not committed to Goldhagen?


On Tue, 16 Sep 1997, Greggor, Martin wrote:

> Andy Austin claims to be...the ONLY real marxist on this list... 

I never made this claim. This is a lie. To continue repeating this lie in
this discussion is to admit to having no real argument against Goldhagen
or me. If Martin doesn't like being a liar, then let's just say he can't
read; how might somebody be capable of passing judgment on Goldhagen when
he can't read?

Nothing you said in your post, Martin, adds to this debate. Goldhagen left
too many important structures and conjunctures out to be doing historical
materialist analysis. I said this first. And he is clear in his argument
that he is not doing Marxian analysis. I was one of the first to point
this out. But this is no reason to reject his analysis. Most history is
not constructed from a historical materialist standpoint. We don't throw
it away. Since Marx argued that ideas could have central importance in
historical transformations and events (or else there would be no
possibility of revolution) and since Engels held that dogma could
predominate in altering social formations, Goldhagen's book is not
incongruent with Marxism; rather, it is incomplete from a Marxian
perspective. I made this argument.

But, please, be my guest, stand in line, take your shot.

Andy




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

   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005