Date: Tue, 11 Nov 1997 12:17:53 -0800
From: Mark Jones <Jones_M-AT-netcomuk.co.uk>
Subject: Re: M-I: Global warming


Another posting untouched by the human mind, from James Heartfield. The kindest
thing to say of him is that he does not know what he is talking about, and that
concerns either Lenin or climatology.

On the latter, since he has set his face not against me but against an
overhwelming consensus of reputable modern science, he has excluded himself from
the discourse and also from the one major issue which connects the left with the
masses.

On the question of Lenin being a fascist, I also have no comment othe than that
Lenin's famous remark about 'martial law' was made in a polemic with  Rosa
Luxemburg in I think 1907 or 1908 -- Chris Burford will know, and BTW Chris, I
should love to see you post something about Pashukanis. The context of the
polemic was what approach to make to the Tsar's new-fangled Duma. Lenin was 
opposed to parliemntary cretinism and Duma-socialism - Luxemburg per contra 
savaged Lenin's 'bureaucratic ultra-centralism' and in dismissing Lenin, 
she spoke of the:'"ego" crushed and pulverised by Russian absolutism re-
emerging as the "ego" of the Russian revolutionary [which] stands on its head 
and proclaims itself anew the mighty consummator of history'. 

Lenin of course was unmoved by these attacks, gladly accepting the 'charge' that 
he wanted to turn the party into a 'political factory' in which 'glorious 
individuals like Trotsky' would be mere 'cogs and screws' and
where 'martial law' would operate.


Forgive me, James, if I do not respond to you while you are in this mode. Go
away and do some reading, and some thinking if possible.


James Heartfield wrote:

> In message <3467C56B.B3486590-AT-netcomuk.co.uk>, Mark_Jones
> <Jones_M-AT-netcomuk.co.uk> writes
> > A splitting issue is El Nino, and our
> >class analysis thereof.
> >
> >Do they run articles on the weather in NLR? I haven't seen a copy for more
> than
> >ten years...
>
> A class analysis of the weather! Now I have heard it all. As absurdities
> go that ranks alongside Louis P's surreal proposition - 'we are talking
> about tumours not alienation'. So why not rename the list 'medical
> international' or meteorology international'.
>
> And what political conclusions arise from a concern with the climate?
>
> This is Mark Jones:
>
> "Only militarised, centralised parties can hope to succeed, and only by
> a severe dragooning of the working class and its allies, and only, as
> Lenin said, by having a party operate like a political factory, with an
> iron division of labour and 'under martial law'."
>
> Forget Lenin, this is Facism. 'Martial law'? 'Dragooning the working
> class'? What Mark presents as his conclusion is actually his starting
> point - the desire to subject those naughty workers to some spartan
> discipline. Playing the petty dictator is the fantasy that he carries
> over from his Stalinist childhood. The only difference is that the moral
> imperative has changed from 'defence of mother Russia' to 'defence of
> mother Earth'. Both slogans are, of course, delusions that only serve to
> provide the spurious impetus to Mark's sado-masochistic impulses.
>
> Anyone would think that there were no hurricanes until capitalism made
> them. Does capitalism make all the bunny rabbits die too? All of the
> high priests of global warming sound off about atmospheric conditions
> they just do not understand. Conjunctural events like a hurricane are
> not attributable to one factor in atmospheric conditions, but many.
> Unless you can isolate all of the likely factors, there is no scientific
> basis to assert that it is caused by any of them.
>
> Here are some simple questions anyone who wants to be taken seriously in
> the discussion of the climate ought to be able to answer:
>
> 1. Abstracting from the supposed effects of CO2 emissions, what was the
> trend in average world temperature levels over the last 500 years?
>
> 2. In natural historical terms do CO2 levels lead or follow temperature
> levels?
>
> 3. Is it always the case that CO2 levels move in the same direction as
> tmperature levels?
>
> Clearly, if we are unable to answer these simple questions there is no
> basis whatsoever for understanding the global warming effect, as there
> would be no way of quantifying the impact of CO2 emissions upon
> temperature.
>
> Fraternally
> --
> James Heartfield
>
>      --- from list marxism-international-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---



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