File spoon-archives/marxism-thaxis.archive/marxism-thaxis_1997/marxism-thaxis.9712, message 579


Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 21:27:16 -0500 (EST)
From: Justin Schwartz <jschwart-AT-freenet.columbus.oh.us>
Subject: Re: M-TH: Re: questions



Well, no Marxists left that _I_ have ever been involved with has written
off the Greens or ecological concerns. The Communist Workers Party hada 
big Green fraction. We had all sorts of Green demand, expressed in the
usual ridiculous and hysterical language. Solidarity has been more soberly
pro-Green. Against the Current regularly runs greenish articles, and a lot
of the comrades out in the West especially do active Green work, some in
the Green Party. I think that's generally true of the sane left. 

I syill doubt whether bourgeoisie care much about us Marxists anymore, the
WSJ notwithstanding. I regard this as unfortunate, of course. Better to be
a menace than a joke.

--jks

On Tue, 16 Dec 1997, Louis N Proyect wrote:

> It depends on who you mean by "we". I would take all the fucking
> apologists for nuclear energy, genocide against indigenous people, etc. 
> like the Sparts, LM, Larouche '73 and flush them down the toilet. This is
> not the kind of Marxism I want to have anything to do with. 
> 
> The real problem for the bourgeoisie is the rather massive environmental
> movement that fights against nuclear power-plants, for survival of the
> Yanomami indians, clean air and water, etc. This gets in the way of
> profits, much more than the drooling sectarian trying to hawk their
> Bolshevique newspapers.
> 
> The problem is that the Marxist left wrote the green movement off as
> "petit-bourgeois" back in the 70s and thus the movement was bereft of a
> Marxist pole. This gave anarchism and other anti-Marxist trends free rein.
> Some of the Marxists simply gave lip-service to the movement, such as the
> American SWP, while other groups viewed it as the enemy, like the Sparts.
> LM started out this way but has become a bourgeois think-tank nowadays for
> all practical purposes. Evidence of this is their reliance on Gregg
> Easterbrook, a neoliberal con-artist who got started with Charles Peters
> in Washington with other scum who went on to work for the New Republic.
> (Michael Kinseley et al.)
> 
> Louis Proyect
> 
> 
> 
> On Tue, 16 Dec 1997, Justin Schwartz wrote:
> 
> > 
> > Louis
> > 
> > The "Fly" analogy is striking, but remind me why the big bourgroisie needs
> > anyone speaking in the name of Marxism to further its interests. Is it
> > because we have such influence with the masses?
> > 
> > --Justin
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >      --- from list marxism-thaxis-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>      --- from list marxism-thaxis-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---





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

   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005