Trojan Horses (was ex-radicals)

Lance Murdoch MurdochLance at netscape.net
Thu Feb 6 08:37:55 PST 2003


loupaulsen at attbi.com said:


> - The material on Chuck0's site is available for recycling to anyone from
> anywhere on the spectrum who wants to oppose, trash, etc. WWP and/or IAC
> and/or ANSWER, and has in fact been used as an information source by the
> right wing, and indeed by the corporate media

Then he should be the first one up against the wall when the revolution comes!


> Therefore, if he becomes aware, or is already aware, that he is supplying
> the right wing with ammunition to use against ANSWER, he feels no
> incentive to desist, take precautions, etc.

I think this is kind of silly. From my reading of Marx, and Marxian material, isn't it stated over and over that Marxian movements are not to be "secret, underground" movements, but instead should be doing everything out front for all to see?

"...Communists should openly, in the face of the whole world, publish their views, their aims, their tendencies...." (Communist Manifesto)

Also, another view from the Marxian camp I've seen is that people tend to see things from the perspective of their class. What's the danger of turning people off to the WWP influence of these marches, are guys in a union suddenly going to stop wanting raises, and start wanting their bosses to get capital gains tax cuts? The right will continue to look at the left with contempt, and the left will either not care about the WWP influence, or try to avoid it once "warned".

I think the idea that it's dangerous to have an internal debate on the left because the right might pick up on it is thoroughly ridiculous. I'm glad there are people out there like Chuck0 keeping me informed of front organizations, entryism, co-opting, and so forth. This is not a police state, so what's there to hide?

On the other hand, things like David Corn going on the O'Reilly show and telling his foaming at the mouth audience that the marches are controlled by communists or whatever doesn't seem kosher to me. That has nothing to do with internal debate at all, it seems like wallowing in the gutter of Hitchens snitching out his friend Sidney Blumenthal to Congress, although not that low. Can you imagine Buchanan ratting out some Reagan aide to Tip O'Neill, or him running to Donahue to inform how some right-wing think tank is steeped in ex-Klan types? No wonder blue collar people are drawn to Buchanan more than a Hitchens or Corn or whatnot, at least he has some sense of what the word "solidarity" means.

I think it has less to do with what information is out there than how it is put out there. It's like naming names in front of HUAC - it's well-known the FBI already knew everything that would be told, but it was felt the ritual of humiliation and betrayal was important to play out. Which is the same case as here - the information is already known by the other side, the difference is in presentation, in an internally-geared manner like Chuck0, or in a quite lame way by Corn, Hitchens and company (although Corn has not sunk to the depth of Hitchens yet).

__________________________________________________________________ The NEW Netscape 7.0 browser is now available. Upgrade now! http://channels.netscape.com/ns/browsers/download.jsp

Get your own FREE, personal Netscape Mail account today at http://webmail.netscape.com/



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list