The left: still dying (was Re: European Unions)

Yoshie Furuhashi furuhashi.1 at osu.edu
Tue Apr 10 21:54:37 PDT 2001


Carrol says:


>Wojtek Sokolowski wrote:
> > At 11:21 AM 4/10/01 -0400, Charles wrote:
> > >>>> seamus2001 at home.com 04/09/01 06:42PM >>>
> > >> >RB
> > >> Take it from me, Jan -- er, RB -- Marx was the last lefty to
>furrow a brow
> > >> in a boardroom.
> > >> Carl
> > >> ((((((((((
> > >> CB: I usually agree with Carl, but the last one to really make the
>> bourgeoisie
> > >worry was Lenin.
> > >********
> > >Debs, to a lesser extent, to be sure.
> > >Ian
> > >********
> > >CB: That's why Mr. Justice Holmes, the great civil libertarian, and the
>> crew on the Supreme Court, found in the very first cases on the First
>> Amendment, that Debs and other socialists were not protected by it when
>> speaking out against workers marching into their own slaughter in WWI .
>>
>> Do not forget Ho Chi Minh and Fidel Castro who effectively held the hordes
>> of US capitalism at bay.
>>
> > wojtek
>
>Look, in response to Carl's post on this I told him not to be stupid --
>meaning that he had a _choice_ here, that he needed only to choose not
>to be stupid. But all the follow-ups on this point are by persons who
>are not stupid but are choosing to be so -- and in so choosing they are
>spitting on the graves of the millions of workers and peasants whose
>struggles are the content of whatever 'fear' any of these names may or
>may not arouse. It is amazing that in a thread mostly devoted to
>attacking intellectuals there should also be such distorted evaluation
>of intellectuals, as though Marx all by himself ever accomplished
>_anything_.

It is not amazing that "in a thread mostly devoted to attacking intellectuals there should also be such distorted evaluation of intellectuals, as though Marx all by himself ever accomplished _anything_." In fact, because (1) "the masses" are thought of as either unintelligent or undesirous of knowledge (as seen in a common complaint that what "intellectuals" say is irrelevant or incomprehensible to "the masses") & because (2) the powers of "intellectuals" are overestimated, presented as if they were God's (i.e., an uncaused cause of the revolution), there arise attacks upon "intellectuals" (who appear to many as if they were "Gods That Failed"). It's a variation of the great man theory of history.

Yoshie



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list