Date   

A Labor Movement to Challenge the Billionaires | Review of *Class Struggle Unionism*, by Joe Burns | Jonathan Kissam | UE News via Portside

Kevin Lindemann and Cathy Campo
 


Re: The past isn't dead. It's not even past.

Joseph Green
 

The article denounces democratic movements as Western plots, humiliations of
"Russia", if you assume "Russia" means the Russian ruling class.

It also says things like "Vladimir Putin ... successfully took on the Herculean task
of reconstituting Russia as a viable state" which is a very euphemistic way of
saying he slaughtered the Chechen people and humiliated the Russian working
class. See my article of June 2000 "Putin's two wars: on Chechnya and Russian
workers" (http://www.communistvoice.org/24cPutinChechnya.html).

-- Joseph Green

On 1 Mar 2022 at 13:04, gilschaeffer82@... wrote:

In a continuing effort to distinguish explanation from
justification, I offer this history lesson for you
reading pleasure.

The Consequences of Humiliating Russia


AW RE: [marxmail] As war in Ukraine rages, Russians look on with increasing dismay

abraham Weizfeld PhD
 

DDM: Some need proof of the neo-Nazis in the Ukraine military. Here it is.

And this militia has been accepted into the regular conscripted Ukrainian military with pay.

via Danny Milton

 

 

 

From: marxmail@groups.io <marxmail@groups.io> On Behalf Of Marv Gandall
Sent: 1 mars 2022 12:36
To: Marxmail <marxmail@groups.io>; Pen-L Economics <pen-l@...>
Subject: [marxmail] As war in Ukraine rages, Russians look on with increasing dismay

 

Posted by David Mandel on the Socialist Project list:

 

Christian Science Monitor

February 28, 2022

As war in Ukraine rages, Russians look on with increasing dismay

The war in Ukraine may have come at a high cost for Vladimir Putin at home. The backlash against the conflict suggests a moral split and loss of trust between the Russian public and its leadership.

By Fred Weir Special correspondent

MOSCOW

 

When Russia annexed Ukraine’s largely Russian-populated territory of Crimea in 2014, it was met with a palpable joy among Russians.

 

What a difference eight years makes.

 

Today, despite the fog of war and a deepening crackdown on civil society, surprising numbers of Russians are expressing shock at and even outright opposition to their country’s escalating invasion of Ukraine.

 

As Russian forces close in on Kyiv and other key Ukrainian cities, and the prospect of hard fighting and large-scale casualties looms, the sort of welcome that the bloodless reunification with Crimea enjoyed – and its coinciding spike in popularity of Russian President Vladimir Putin – seems largely absent today.

 

Even the tone of Russian state TV is not jubilant as it was then, but more insistent on the patriotic imperative to “support the troops” in time of war.

 

“There is a feeling that the whole world has turned against Russia, and that we can never win this,” says Olga Kryshtanovskaya, one of Russia’s leading sociologists. Her husband is Ukrainian, and like many Russians, she has close contacts in Ukraine. “Putin has lost a lot of support among the elite. It turns out their loyalty comes at a high price. Some people in my own circle have a different point of view from mine, so I decided to break off contacts with them. It’s not just a difference of political views anymore. It’s a moral discrepancy.

 

“More people are switching from TV to internet sources. Everyone is looking for truthful information. No one is interested in Russian or Ukrainian propaganda; people want independent and neutral information.”

 

A social (media) shift

 

Increasing numbers of Russians, especially the young, no longer take their news from official sources. They turn to the internet, especially the messaging app Telegram, where even Ukrainian-based channels are readily available. Despite attempts by Russia’s state media censor, Roskomnadzor, to slow or obscure the sharing of war-related content on Facebook, Twitter, and other social media platforms, the measures seem so far almost childishly easy to evade.

 

Zoya Svetova, a journalist and human rights activist, says she doesn’t watch television at all. “I compare different opinions on the social nets. Many people are accessing and reading Ukrainian sites,” she says. “Social media has a lot of advantages. You can hear witnesses speaking about their experiences. There are videos of bombings, destruction, and so on. Many different views can be heard. The authorities realize that social media is a weapon, and that’s why they are trying to limit it.”

 

It’s early yet, and analysts caution that much depends on the course of the war going forward. But in recent days, tens of thousands of anti-war activists have protested in major Russian cities, and at least 5,000 have been detained. An online petition demanding an immediate end to the war has garnered almost a million signatures, while open letters of condemnation have proliferated, including one signed by over 6,000 doctors and medical workers, and another by more than 5,000 architects.

 

Leonid Gozman, an opposition politician, says he senses an approaching sea change in public opinion.

 

“I myself stood in a one-man picket [on Sunday] in the center of Moscow with a sign that said ‘No to War!’ and ‘Putin Must Resign!’ and not a single person expressed a negative opinion to me,” he says. “On the contrary, many came over to offer their support.” Solitary pickets are one of the few forms of protest that do not require an official permit under Russian law.

 

It’s hard to gauge whether Mr. Putin’s vaunted popularity has taken a hit after several rambling speeches in which he revealed sweeping war objectives that would spell the end of sovereign Ukraine. A CNN poll published barely a week ago found that half of Russians would support the use of force to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO. Pollsters say those numbers are probably holding up so far. But there seems little doubt that the war has polarized Russians more than any event in recent years.

 

The Kremlin’s red lines

 

Russian authorities describe the ongoing war as a “special operation” and have made clear that public use of non-approved terminology might entail legal consequences.

 

“A lot of people have understood that they need to watch what they say,” says Alexei Makarkin, deputy director of the Center of Political Technologies, an independent Moscow think tank. “Our laws are elastic, as is the way courts interpret them. We have a law about false information, introduced in 2020 and meant to combat fakes about the COVID pandemic. Information coming from the state is considered reliable, hence the term ‘special operation’ is approved for use. But words like ‘war’ and ‘invasion’ are regarded as fake news, and people who say that can face fines.”

 

According to the independent online news outlet Meduza, Russian schools are being issued official guidelines for how to discuss the situation with students. For example: “To a possible question ‘Is this a war with Ukraine? Do we need to do this?’ the teacher is advised to answer, ‘There is no war with Ukraine, but a special peacekeeping operation, the purpose of which is to contain the nationalists who oppress the Russian-speaking population.’”

 

The tone on state TV programs is surprisingly muted, says Masha Lipman, senior associate at the PONARS Eurasia program at George Washington University.

 

“On state TV talk shows you can often hear people saying things like, ‘No one likes war, but once you’re in it, you’d better win,’” she says. “It sends the message that anti-war activism is wrong and inappropriate when Russian troops are fighting in the field. Being a pacifist may sound noble on principle, but in such times you should be patriotic and support the troops.”

 

Still, some Russian oligarchs have publicly taken just that pacifist position. Billionaires Mikhail Fridman and Oleg Deripaska both called for an end to the conflict, in a break with the Kremlin line. And Kremlin insider and Chelsea F.C. owner Roman Abramovich is reportedly trying to help facilitate peace talks between Ukraine and Russia.

 

Much will depend on how long the war goes on, and how bad its fallout becomes for the Russian public, says Sergei Davidis, a lawyer with the now-banned human rights group Memorial.

 

“Yes, the majority of the population is silent. They are always silent,” he says. “But more and more people are already getting involved in anti-war activities. If the war takes an unsuccessful turn, and there is a dramatic worsening of the economic pain and isolation faced by Russians, we can expect those numbers to grow. All the more so since no one can explain why on earth Russia even needs this war?”

 


Naomi Klein: Toxic Nostalgia, From Putin to Trump to the Trucker Convoys

Charles Keener
 

Toxic Nostalgia, From Putin to Trump to the Trucker Convoys (theintercept.com)

NOSTALGIA FOR EMPIRE is what seems to drive Vladimir Putin — that and a desire to overcome the shame of punishing economic shock therapy imposed on Russia at the end of the Cold War. Nostalgia for American “greatness” is part of what drives the movement Donald Trump still leads — that and a desire to overcome the shame of having to face the villainy of white supremacy that shaped the founding of the United States and mutilates it still. Nostalgia is also what animates the Canadian truckers who occupied Ottawa for the better part of a month, wielding their red-and-white flags like a conquering army, evoking a simpler time when their consciences were undisturbed by thoughts of the bodies of Indigenous children, whose remains are still being discovered on the grounds of those genocidal institutions that once dared to call themselves “schools.”
This is not the warm and cozy nostalgia of fuzzily remembered childhood pleasures; it’s an enraged and annihilating nostalgia that clings to false memories of past glories against all mitigating evidence.


Socialist Alliance statement: Russia out of Ukraine! No to NATO!

Chris Slee
 


Re: Les: Rule no 1 - is waht?

hari kumar
 

Thanks Les! H


Review and Debate on Bari Weiss’s 'How to Fight Anti-Semitism' 2021

abraham Weizfeld PhD
 

Review and Debate on Bari Weiss’s

How to Fight Anti-Semitism

https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/616727/how-to-fight-anti-semitism-by-bari-weiss/

2021

 

2022-03-01

 

By Dr abraham Weizfeld Phd

[ Ivrit follows here ]

 

 

            To take on a struggle to oppose and defeat Antisemitism it would have been à priori to adopt the Jewish Bund’s history beginning in 1897 that culminated in the Partisan Resistance against the Nazi occupation of the USSR (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics – to remind one of its foundations). But this is not to be since Weiss only seeks to overcome the Anti-Zionist critique of the Zionist Nation-State enterprise byt the Anti-war Left and the Jewish-American opposition that is now 25% Anti-Zionist and Anti-Apartheid and not the 5% that is claimed in this book.

            Nonetheless Weiss is obliged to refer to the Jewish Bund, if only to dismiss it as irrelevant, even though Zionism is discredited, even by Amnesty International.

 

            Here is the only reference made to the Jewish Bund;

 

And yet it's easy to make the intellectual case that anti Zionism and anti-Semitism are distinct.

First, there is a long history of anti-Zionist Jews. Anti Zionist Jews today point most readily (and proudly) to the Bund, which emerged in Russia in 1897, the same year that Theodor Herzl formed the World Zionist Organization. Herzl's solution to the Jewish plight was Jewish self-determination. The socialists of the Bund begged to differ. The way to address Europe's rampant anti-Semitism was not running away to the Middle East, the Bund argued, but staying put and joining together with the working class in solidarity.

The Bund and the world they defended no longer exists. Yet their ideas - ideas that, unlike Zionism, were not able to save Jews from systematic oppression or mass murder - are today being taken up once again. The crucial difference, of course, is that when the Bund opposed Israel in early-twentieth-century Russia, the state did not actually exist. Nor did the group know of the bloodletting that Hitler would unleash on Europe. And yet despite the lessons of history, various left-wing groups, some primarily populated by Jews, continue to oppose the existence of the Jewish state. [1]

 

            To reply to this direct reproach made to the existing Jewish Socialist Bund activists of today, one may begin by pointing out the continuing presence of the Jewish Bund in various formats, including our activist Anti-Zionist movement the Jewish Socialist Bund < https://Jewish-Socialist-Bund.net/ >, the North American Bundist Chapters of the Workers’ Circle, the Yiddishkeit Chapter of Melbourne, Australia and others like the Jewish refugee organisation of Toronto, the Warszawa-Lodz Mutual Benefit Society. There, the Jewish survivors of the Warsaw and Lodz Ghettos came together by political affinity with the Jewish Bund, which had worked to save the refugees from Warsaw into Russian forests and so becoming Partisans, as in the case of my mother’s brother Myer Goldseider. My own existence as a Bundist from birth is not to be denied either, especially since my perspective is now codified in the Anti-Zionist doctoral Thesis I completed, and which was accepted by the Université du Québec à Montréal despite vigorous Zionist opposition.

            It is necessary though to consider the nature of an argument that the idea no longer exists because the originator/s no longer live/s. As such, all human history and thought are no longer of value. In the Jewish-Judaic context to make such an argument is to be considered a kind of pathetic logic. Such an argument is though closely related to Weiss’s follow-up which is that the Jewish Bund had no idea of what was coming from the Nazis and should have run away. This is a display of blatant self-deception since what actually occurred is that the Bundist did organise a way to run-away to the USSR while the Zionists had no means to bring the Ashken’azi European population to Palestine, except for a few pro-Zionists from Germany and Hungary, namely 60,000 German Zionists and some 1,400 Hungarian Zionists. This argument turns around the actual course of events.

            The second layer of the Weiss argument is that since the Jewish Bund could not stop Nazism from developing then it has lost its credibility politically. Zionism considered and still considers that the struggle against Antisemitism to be futile as this racist national chauvinism is permanently ingrained in Occidental and now Oriental political culture. This defeatist perspective is based in the assumption of the non-transitory nature of capitalism which generates such Antisemitism as an ideological defence against socialist revolution.

            Another layer to this illogical onion is the subtle relief that the Jewish Bund was so devasted by the Nazis, as this seemingly eliminates the credible opposition to Zionism, or Marxism for that matter, in other similar sectarian responses.

            Knowing that the Jewish Bund disturbs the Zionist rationale with reason, Weiss and Zionism in general, resort to the final argument that is thus considered crucial; that the Zionist State exists and furthermore that it exists as a Jewish Nation-State. This is considered to be self-determination or rather this is what self-determination is considered to be and nothing else. This overcomes the initial Anti-Zionist argument that Zionism was idealist and could not achieve its objective. This major change in the treatment of the Ashken’azim is largely due to the matter of what had to be done with the Jewish refugees of the Nazi Holocaust. Since the Western hemisphere of countries were not interested in taking in Jewish refugees, unless obliged under law for family unification purposes. Likewise, the Stalinist programme of assimilation was negated by the subsequent purges, executions and detentions tht targeted Jewish comrades more than any other. There were no proposals for Jewish National-Cultural-Territorial Autonomy and the Jewish survivors knew better than to ask even, even though there should have been.

Basically, the Zionist argument’s credible here rests upon a Hegelian method of thinking, which considers only that which is real to be rational since that is the natural development of things. The real is rational and accordingly the reason why the Zionist movement, in both its political wings of Right and Left gave up the struggle against Nazism. Instead, it sought to take advantage of the conditions to secure its own survival while abandoning the boycott of Germany in order to defeat the nescient Nazi State. This is of course the abandonment of the European Jewish Ashken’azim to their fate under Nazism. While irrational this was also the strategy of the British Crown and State which sought to appease Nazism. Stalinist Russia did as well, to its own savage disaster.

Incoherent though it is, Zionism argues that since it was the only avenue of security after the Holocaust, that it was so before the Holocaust as well. The fatal assumption here is that while Zionism formed a Nation-State of its own as a recourse to Fascism, this offered no guarantee that such a State would be respected by Fascism itself, even while it adopts the same concept of national social purity. Without the defeat of Fascism, the Jewish communities of Palestine would have been exterminated, nonetheless. The only consideration to be made here is what was done to oppose Fascism by the Zionist movement – the answer is not much and then only when there was no other choice to be made in Warsaw with the resistance of 1943, the first major opposition to the advance of Nazi Germany.

When Weiss refers to “the Jewish state’, one wonders who she would reconcile with the presence of a majority of Jewish people who live in the United States of America. There is no possible correspondence between the concept of a ‘Jewish State, and the liberal notion of a secular pluralist State instead. To support or want both at the same time is obviously contradictory. The position of Jewish-Americans who support the Jewish Nation-State find themselves in contradiction to their own existence and undermines their legitimacy in the pluralist civil society due to the claim to exclusivity and national chauvinism.

How can the right to self-determination be claimed when such self-determination by the White Supremacist base also asserts its claim to the very same right in tht context where a majority of Jewish people are actually living and choose to live. Whose self-determination then counts in either case, the USA or Palestine. The alliance with USA’s Christian Zionist sentiment by the Zionist State and its movement internationally is thus built on the premise of the exclusion of the Jewish people itself and so cont4adicts Jewish self-determination in any case.

Self-determination turns against itself in such circumstances and is found to be lacking. The problem being that one given case for self-determination may very well contradict the claim to self-determination by another, as in the case of the Palestinian struggle for freedom against the Zionist State. To maintain the Right of Self-Determination, it is necessary to take into consideration such a Right to be universal and not exclusive. Such a Right can thus only be exercised as a Right in reciprocity to any other such Right to Self-Determination. It is Reciprocity that is the Principle and not Self-Determination alone.

This is how a resolution of the ongoing civil war against the Palestinians under Occupation will be achived with the Federation of Palestinian and Hebrew Nations based in the Jewish Bundist concept of National-Cultural Autonomy (see the book:

< https://www.academia.edu/38380122/The_Federation_of_Palestinian_and_Hebrew_Nations 

https://www.cambridgescholars.com/product/978-1-5275-1313-6   >

 

All in all, it must be said that while Zionism offers the same old, same old system of Nation-States which led to the destruction of Jewish European civilization, it becomes necessary to overcome the limitations of the State sponsored security as a Nation-State to become a Federation of Federations based in Constitutional provisions for reciprocal self-determination by means of Constituent Assemblies - rather than the liberal democratic State and its social rights accorded to the individual but none to the various national minorities inherent to Civil Society. The plight of the nationalities in Civil Society is the Fourth World of oppression by the First World, in the First World. This internal imperialism is most evident in the status of the First Nations left to their misery on reservations in the USA without political rights or resources. The Black Nation is also of the Fourth World.

The United Front of such nationalities, including the Jewish nationality, provides the critical mass to overcome the White Supremacist Nation-State rooted in the European working-class aristocracy of labour with its privileges. The House slaves of today.

It is interesting that the influence of the Jewish Bund has extended into the center of attention by the Zionist ideologues such as Bari Weiss. Yes, we are “various left-wing groups, some primarily populated by Jews, continue to oppose the existence of the Jewish state” because Zionism merely accepts Antisemitism as such even while its allies are building its forces based in Antisemitism and because Zionism plays into the hands of Antisemitism by providing examples of Jewish practice that are easily accepted as morally reprehensible. The identification of the Jewish People with the Zionist State also provides a pretext to portray all Jewish people in the same light. The terms Israel and Israelis have been foisted as being identical to being Jewish and as such all hostility to the Zionist enterprise falls on the head of Jewish people everywhere. Whereas previously even one Jewish act in disrepute provided sufficient motivation for Antisemitic pogroms for some decades, it is now the grand Zionist project that is being substituted for the Jewish identity with its consequent loss of credibility allowing some to consider that Antisemitism is merely the consequence of the Jewish People’s own national character and actions. This is a phenomenon of both the Right and the Left tendencies. And this is of course also found in the thinking of the young Karl Marx, which he never discounted.

The intersectionality of the Jewish Bund seeking a working-class United Front has become a common perspective of developing Post-Marxism and Post-Leninist currents of thought. Third-Worldism applied to the First World recognizes the oppression of the national minorities on top of the class oppression, nationalities that are predominantly affected being the less privileged layers of the working-class. This also recognizes the oppressed nationalities in the lower castes of the middle and upper classes as well. This demonstrates that class privileges cannot insulate the oppressed nationalities from their fate in the combined class and national stratification, even in the liberal States.

 

Considering that the faculty and intellectuals had already been denounced by Bari Weiss for possibly holding Anti-Zionist views, I should add that in the particular reference here following it would seem that this is directed to myself, holding a PhD (Doctor of Philosophy), as mentioned by Weiss [2] ;

Neo-Nazis, in a way, are easy. We know they wish us dead. Anti-Semites with PhDs, the ones who defend their bigotry as enlightened thinking are harder to fight.

Other Jewish dissidents denounced are either faculty or lawyers, so the only PhD evident is me. To be associated with Neo-Nazis, being a second generation Holocaust refugee, in such a  manner, is irrational to say the least and defamatory otherwise. It should be noted as well that this snipit of venom was placed apart from the description of the Jewish Bund for fear of contradicting oneself, since it is claimed that the Jewish Bund no longer exists. We are the Jewish Bund and we emerge from the deprived and censored underground of the Jewish political culture.

 

            The Zionist American Jewish mind is assimilated to the extent even to the point of externalizing the Holocaust, since it did not directly confront their own self-interest. As such to insult one who is from a survivor refugee family, is to adopt the national chauvinism of the White Supremacist USA, together with the Protestant-inspired assimilated mentality of Zionism.

 

AW

 

[ Ivrit follows here ]

 

Dr abraham Weizfeld

Phd UQÀM,  MA York U.,  BSc UdeW

saalaha@...

514 284 66 42  Montréal

514 235 7187 Mobile

+970 (0)569 538 169 Nablus, Palestine

 

The Federation of Palestinian and Hebrew Nations

https://www.academia.edu/38380122/The_Federation_of_Palestinian_and_Hebrew_Nations 

https://www.cambridgescholars.com/product/978-1-5275-1313-6 

 

Nation,  Society  and the State :

the reconciliation  of  Palestinian and  Jewish Nationhood

 

http://www.archipel.uqam.ca/7308/1/D2843.pdf

 

http://bookstore.authorhouse.com/Products/SKU-000425888/NATION--SOCIETY--AND--THE-STATE.aspx

 

https://www.academia.edu/40349204/VOLUME_I_-_SECOND_EDITION_THESIS_NATION_SOCIETY_AND_THE_STATE

 

https://www.academia.edu/40349264/VOLUME_TWO_SECOND_EDITION_THESIS_-_METHODOLOGY_OF_NATIONAL_IDENTITY

 

 

https://independent.academia.edu/AbrahamWeizfeld

 

Skype/Yahoo/Twitter/YouTube : eibieman

 

FaceBook : Abraham Weizfeld

 

 

 

 


 

 

סקירה ודיון על בארי וייס של

כיצד להילחם נגד סמיטיזם

https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/616727/how-to-fight-anti-semitism-by-bari-weiss/

2021

 

2022-03-01

 

מאת ד"ר אברהם ויצפלד Phd

 

 

          כדי להתמודד עם מאבק להתנגד ולהביס את האנטישמיות, היה זה א-לפני לאמץ את ההיסטוריה של הבונד היהודי החל משנת 1897, שהגיעה לשיאה בהתנגדות הפרטיזנית נגד הכיבוש הנאצי של ברית המועצות (איחוד הרפובליקות הסובייטיות הסוציאליסטיות – להזכיר לאחד מיסודותיו). אבל זה לא יהיה מכיוון שוייס רק מבקש להתגבר על הביקורת האנטי-ציונית על מפעל הלאום-מדינת הציוני על ידי השמאל האנטי-מלחמתי והאופוזיציה היהודית-אמריקאית שכיום היא 25% אנטי-ציונית ואנטי-אפרטהייד ולא על 5% הנטענים בספר זה.

          עם זאת, וייס מחויב להתייחס לבונד היהודי, ולו רק כדי לפטור אותו כלא רלוונטי, למרות שהציונות מופללת, אפילו על ידי אמנסטי אינטרנשיונל.

 

          הנה ההתייחסות היחידה לבונד היהודי;

 

ובכל זאת קל לטעון אינטלקטואלית שאנטי-ציונות ואנטישמיות הן ברורות.

 ראשית, יש היסטוריה ארוכה של יהודים אנטי-ציונים. יהודים אנטי-ציוניים מצביעים היום (בגאווה) על  הבונד, שהופיע ברוסיה בשנת 1897, באותה שנה שבה הקים תיאודור הרצל את ההסתדרות הציונית העולמית.  הפתרון של הרצל למצוקה היהודית היה הגדרה עצמית יהודית. הסוציאליסטים של הבונד התחננו לחלוק על כך. הדרך להתמודד עם האנטישמיות המשתוללת באירופה לא הייתה לברוח למזרח התיכון, טען הבונד, אך נשאר במקום ומתאחד עם מעמד הפועלים כאות הזדהות.

בונד והעולם שהם הגנו עליו כבר לא קיימים. עם זאת, רעיונותיהם -  אידס שבניגוד לציונות, אינם מסוגלים להציל יהודים מדיכוי שיטתי או רצח המוני - הם היום נלקחים שוב. ההבדל המהותי, כמובן, הוא שכאשר הבונד התנגד לישראל בתחילת המאה העשרים ברוסיה, המדינה לא הייתה קיימת בפועל. הקבוצה גם לא ידעה על הקזת הדם שהיטלר ישחרר על אירופה. ועדיין, למרות לקחי ההיסטוריה, קבוצות שמאל שונות, חלקן מאוכלסות בעיקר ביהודים, ממשיכות להתנגד לקיומה של המדינה היהודית.  כדי להשיב לנזיפה ישירה זו של פעילי הבונד הסוציאליסטים היהודים הקיימים של ימינו, ניתן להתחיל בהצבעה על המשך נוכחות הבונד היהודי בפורמטים שונים, כולל התנועה האנטי-ציונית הפעילה שלנו הבונד הסוציאליסטי היהודי https://Jewish-Socialist-Bund.net/  , הפרקים הבונדיסטיים הצפון אמריקאיים של מעגל הפועלים, פרק היידישקייט במלבורן, אוסטרליה ואחרים כמו ארגון הפליטים היהודי של טורונטו, האגודה לתועלת הדדית של ורשווה-לודז'. שם הניצולים היהודים של גטאות ורשה ולודז' התאגדו בזיקה פוליטית לבונד היהודי, שפעל להצלת הפליטים מוורשה ליערות רוסיים כדי להפוך לפרטיזנים, כמו במקרה של אחיה של אמי, מאייר גולדסיידר. גם קיומי כבונדיסט מלידה אינו מתכחש, במיוחד לאור העובדה שנקודת המבט שלי מקודדת בתזה האנטי-ציונית שסיימתי, ואשר התקבלה על ידי התאחדות קוויבק א-מונטריאל למרות התנגדות ציונית נמרצת. עם זאת, יש לקחת בחשבון את טבעו של טיעון שהרעיון כבר לא קיים מכיוון שהיוזם/ים כבר לא חי/ים. ככזה, כל ההיסטוריה והמחשבה האנושית כבר אינן בעלות ערך. בהקשר היהודי-יהדותי כדי לטעון טיעון כזה ייחשב למעין היגיון פתטי. טענה כזו קשורה קשר הדוק למעקב של וייס, שהוא שלבונד היהודי לא היה מושג מה מגיע מהנאצים והיה צריך לברוח. זוהי מפגן של הטעיה עצמית בוטה שכן מה שקרה בפועל הוא שהבונדיסטים אכן ארגנו דרך לברוח מברית המועצות בעוד שלציונים לא היו אמצעים להביא את האוכלוסייה האירופית האשכנזית לפלשתינה, למעט כמה פרו-ציונים מגרמניה והונגריה, כלומר 60,000 ציונים גרמנים וכ-1,400 ציונים הונגרים. טיעון זה הופך את מהלך האירועים בפועל. השכבה השנייה של הטיעון של וייס היא שמכיוון שהבונד היהודי לא הצליח למנוע מהנאציזם להתפתח אז הוא איבד את אמינותו פוליטית. הציונות נחשבת ועדיין סבורה שהמאבק באנטישמיות הוא חסר תועלת שכן השוביניזם הלאומי הגזעני הזה טבוע באופן קבוע בתרבות הפוליטית האוקסידנטלית וכעת המזרחית. נקודת מבט תבוסתנית זו מבוססת על ההנחה של האופי הלא חולף של הקפיטליזם המייצר אנטישמיות כזו כהגנה אידיאולוגית מפני המהפכה הסוציאליסטית נדבך נוסף לבצל הלא הגיוני הזה הוא ההקלה העדינה שהבונד היהודי היה כה סוטה על ידי הנאצים, שכן הדבר מבטל לכאורה את ההתנגדות האמינה לציונות, או למרקסיזם לצורך העניין, בתגובות עדתיות דומות אחרות. בידיעה שהבונד היהודי מפריע לרציונל הציוני בהיגיון, וייס והציונות בכלל, נוקטים בטיעון הסופי שנחשב מכריע; שהמדינה הציונית קיימת יתר על כן שהיא קיימת כמדינת לאום יהודית. זה נחשב להגדרה עצמית או ליתר דיוק זה מה שהגדרה עצמית נחשבת ולא שום דבר אחר. זה מתגבר על הטענה האנטי-ציונית הראשונית שהציונות אידיאליסטית ולא יכולה להשיג את מטרתה. שינוי משמעותי זה בטיפול באשכנזים נובע במידה רבה מה היה צריך לעשות עם הפליטים היהודים של השואה הנאצית. מאחר שחצאי המדינות המערביות לא היו מעוניינות בקליטת פליטים יהודים, אלא אם כן התחייבו על פי חוק למטרות איחוד משפחות. כמו כן, תוכנית ההתבוללות הסטליניסטית נשללה על ידי הטיהורים, ההוצאות להורג והמעצרים הבאים נגד חברים יהודים יותר מכל דבר אחר. לא היו הצעות לאוטונומיה לאומית-תרבותית-טריטוריאלית יהודית והניצולים היהודים ידעו טוב יותר מאשר לשאול אפילו, למרות שהיה צריך להיות. בעיקרון, הטיעון הציוני אמין כאן נשען על שיטת חשיבה הגליאנית, הרואה רק את מה שהוא אמיתי להיות רציונלי שכן הוא ההתפתחות הטבעית של הדברים. האמיתי הוא רציונלי ובהתאם לכך הסיבה לכך שהתנועה הציונית, הן כנפיה הפוליטיות של ימין והן של השמאל, ויתרה על המאבק בנאציזם. במקום זאת, היא ביקשה לנצל את התנאים כדי להבטיח את הישרדותה תוך נטישת החרם על גרמניה כדי להביס את המדינה הנאצית הנתונה. זוהי כמובן ההסתה של האשכנזים היהודים האירופאים לגורלם תחת הנאציזם. למרות שזה לא הגיוני זו הייתה גם האסטרטגיה של הכתר והמדינה הבריטית שביקשו לפייס את הנאציזם. רוסיה הסטליניסטית עשתה גם כן, לאסון הפראי שלה.

הציונות טוענת כי מאחר שזו הייתה שדרת הביטחון היחידה לאחר השואה, כך היה גם לפני השואה. ההנחה הגורלית כאן היא שבעוד שהציונות הקדימה את מדינת ניטון משלה כמפלט לפשיזם, הדבר לא הציע שום ערובה לכך שמדינה כזו תכובד על ידי הפשיזם עצמו, גם אם היא מאמצת את אותו מושג של טוהר חברתי לאומי. ללא תבוסת הפשיזם, הקהילות היהודיות בפלסטין היו מושמדות. השיקול היחיד שניתן לעשות כאן הוא מה שנעשה כדי להתנגד לפשיזם על ידי התנועה הציונית התשובה היא לא הרבה ואז רק כאשר לא הייתה ברירה אחרת לעשות בוורשה עם ההתנגדות של 1943, ההתנגדות הגדולה הראשונה לקידום גרמניה הנאצית. כשוייס מתייחסת ל"מדינה היהודית", אפשר לתהות את מי היא תתפייס עם נוכחותם של רוב היהודים שחיים בארצות הברית של אמריקה. אין אפשרות להתאים בין המושג 'מדינה יהודית', לבין הרעיון הליברלי של מדינה פלורליסטית חילונית במקום. לתמוך או לרצות את שניהם בו זמנית הוא ללא ספק סותר. עמדתם של יהודים-אמריקאים התומכים במדינת הלאום היהודית עומדת בסתירה לקיומם ומערערת את הלגיטימיות שלהם בחברה האזרחית הפלורליסטית בשל הטענה לבלעדיות ולשוביניזם לאומי.

 

כיצד ניתן לטעון את הזכות להגדרה עצמית כאשר הגדרה עצמית כזו על ידי בסיס העליונות הלבנה טוענת גם היא את טענתה לאותה זכות בדיוק בהקשר שבו רוב היהודים למעשה חיים ובוחרים לחיות. שההגדרה העצמית שלו נחשבת אז בכל מקרה, ארה"ב או פלסטין. הברית עם הסנטימנט הציוני הנוצרי של ארה"ב על ידי המדינה הציונית ותנועתה בעולם בנויה אפוא על הנחת היסוד של הדרת העם היהודי עצמו ולכן מכל מקרה מבססת את ההגדרה העצמית היהודית. מרתעה עצמית פונה נגד עצמה בנסיבות כאלה ונמצאת חסרה. הבעיה היא שבמקרה אחד שניתן להגדרה עצמית עשוי בהחלט לסתור את הטענה להגדרה עצמית של אחר, כמו במקרה של המאבק הפלסטיני לחופש נגד המדינה הציונית. כדי לשמור על זכות ההגדרה העצמית, יש לקחת בחשבון זכות כזו להיות אוניברסלית ולא בלעדית. לפיכך, זכות כזו יכולה להיות מיושרת רק כ זכות הדדיות לכל זכות אחרת להגדרה עצמית. ההדדיות היא העיקרון ולא הדטרמינטון העצמי בלבד. כך תתקבל החלטה על מלחמת האזרחים המתמשכת נגד הפלסטינים תחת הכיבוש, כאשר פדרציית המדינות הפלסטיניות והעבריות תתבסס על התפיסה הבונדיסטית היהודית של אוטונומיה לאומית-תרבותית (ראו בספר:

< https://www.academia.edu/38380122/The_Federation_of_Palestinian_and_Hebrew_Nations 

https://www.cambridgescholars.com/product/978-1-5275-1313-6   >

 

בסך הכל, יש לומר כי בעוד הציונות מציעה את אותה מערכת ישנה וישנה של מדינות לאום שהובילה להשמדת הציוויליזציה האירופית היהודית, יש צורך להתגבר על מגבלות הביטחון בחסות המדינה כמדינת לאום כדי להפוך לפדרציה של פדרציות המבוססות על עצמאות חוקתית להגדרה עצמית הדדית באמצעות אסיפות חוקתיות, במקום המדינה הדמוקרטית הליברלית ומגבלותיה שהוענקו ליחיד, אך אף אחת מהן למיעוטים הלאומיים השונים הטבועים בחברה האזרחית. מצוקת הלאומים בחברה האזרחית היא העולם הרביעי של דיכוי העולם הראשון, בעולם הראשון. אימפריאליזם פנימי זה ניכר ביותר במעמדן של האומות הראשונות שנותרו לאומללותן על מילואים ללא זכויות פוליטיות או משאבים. האומה השחורה היא גם העולם הרביעי בארה"ב. החזית המאוחדת של לאומים כאלה, כולל הלאום היהודי, מספקת את המסה הקריטית כדי להתגבר על מדינת הלאום העליונה הלבנה המושרשת באצולה האירופית של העבודה עם זכויות היתר שלה. עבדי הבית של היום. מעניין שהשפעת הבונד היהודי הגיעה למרכז תשומת הלב של האידיאולוגים הציונים כמו בארי וייס. כן, אנחנו "קבוצות שמאל שונות, חלקן מאוכלסות בעיקר על ידי יהודים, ממשיכות להתנגד לקיומה של המדינה היהודית" משום שהציונות מקבלת את האנטישמיות ככזו גם כאשר בעלות בריתה בונות את כוחותיה המבוססות על אנטישמיות ומכיוון שהציונות משחקת לידי האנטישמיות על ידי מתן דוגמאות לפרקטיקה של ישו המקובלות בקלות כגמול מוסרי. זיהוי העם היהודי עם המדינה הציונית מקדם גם תירוץ לרתוח את כל היהודים באותו אור. המונחים שישראל וישראלים נחשבו זהים להיותם יהודים וככאלה כולם מארחים את המפעל הציוני נופלים על ראש העם היהודי בכל מקום. בעוד שבעבר אפילו מעשה יהודי אחד שנודע לשמצה סיפק מוטיבציה מספקת לפוגרומים אנטישמיים במשך כמה עשורים, כעת זהו הפרויקט הציוני הגדול המוחלף בזהות היהודית באובדן האמינות שלו, מה שמאפשר לחלקם לחשוב שהאנטישמיות היא רק תוצאה של אופיו ומעשיו הלאומיים של העם היהודי. זוהי תופעה של נטיות הימין והשמאל. זה כמובן נמצא גם בחשיבה של קרל מרקס הצעיר, שהוא מעולם לא הנחה

 

            הצטלבותו של הבונד היהודי המחפש חזית מאוחדת ממעמד הפועלים הפכה לפרספקטיבה משותפת של התנועות הפוסט-מרקסיסטיות והפוסט-לניניסטיות המתפתחות. העולם השלישי המיושם על העולם הראשון מכיר בדיכוי המיעוטים הלאומיים בנוסף לדיכוי המעמדי המשפיע בעיקר על השכבות הפחות מיוחסות של מעמד הפועלים. זה גם מכיר את הלאומים המדוכאים במעמדות הנמוכים של המעמד הבינוני והמעמד הגבוה גם כן. זה ממחיש שזכויות מעמדיות אינן יכולות לבודד את הלאומים המדוכאים מגורלם במעמד וברדידים הלאומיים, אפילו במדינות הליברליות. בהתחשב בכך שהסגל והאינטלקטואלים כבר הוקעו על כך שהם מחזיקים בדעות אנטי-ציוניות, עלי להוסיף כי בהתייחסות הספציפית כאן בעקבותיה נראה כי זה מכוון לעצמי, מחזיק דוקטורט (דוקטור לפילוסופיה) כפי שהוזכר על ידי וייס ; ניאו-נאצים, במובן מסוים, הם קלים. אנחנו יודעים שהם היו רוצים שנמות. אנטישמים עם דוקטורטים, אלה שמגנים על הגזענות שלהם כחשיבה נאורה קשה יותר להילחם. מתנגדי משטר יהודים אחרים הם אנשי סגל או עורכי דין, כך שהדוקטורט היחיד הוא אני. לקשר אותי לניאו-נאצים, להיות דור שני לפליט שואה, באופן כזה, זה לא הגיוני בלשון המעטה ומשמיץ אחרת. המוח היהודי-אמריקאי הציוני מתבולל עד כדי החצנת השואה, שכן הוא לא התעמת ישירות עם האינטרס העצמי שלהם. ככזה להעליב את מי שהוא ממשפחת פליטים ניצולה, הוא לאמץ את השוביניזם הלאומי של ארה"ב העליונות הלבנה יחד עם המנטליות הטמעה בהשראת הפרוטסטנטים של הציונות.

 

            יצוין גם כי חיתוך ארס זה הונח בנפרד מתיאור הבונד היהודי מחשש לסתירה, שכן נטען כי הבונד היהודי אינו קיים עוד. אנחנו הבונד היהודי ואנחנו יוצאים מהמחתרת המקופחת והמצונזרת של התרבות הפוליטית היהודית

 

 

 

Dr abraham Weizfeld

Phd UQÀM,  MA York U.,  BSc UdeW

saalaha@...

514 284 66 42  Montréal

514 235 7187 Mobile

+970 (0)569 538 169 Nablus, Palestine

 

The Federation of Palestinian and Hebrew Nations

https://www.academia.edu/38380122/The_Federation_of_Palestinian_and_Hebrew_Nations 

https://www.cambridgescholars.com/product/978-1-5275-1313-6 

 

Nation,  Society  and the State :

the reconciliation  of  Palestinian and  Jewish Nationhood

 

http://www.archipel.uqam.ca/7308/1/D2843.pdf

 

http://bookstore.authorhouse.com/Products/SKU-000425888/NATION--SOCIETY--AND--THE-STATE.aspx

 

https://www.academia.edu/40349204/VOLUME_I_-_SECOND_EDITION_THESIS_NATION_SOCIETY_AND_THE_STATE

 

https://www.academia.edu/40349264/VOLUME_TWO_SECOND_EDITION_THESIS_-_METHODOLOGY_OF_NATIONAL_IDENTITY

 

 

https://independent.academia.edu/AbrahamWeizfeld

 

Skype/Yahoo/Twitter/YouTube : eibieman

 

FaceBook : Abraham Weizfeld

 

           

 

 



[1]           Bari Weiss, How To Fight Anti-Semitism, Crown Trade Paperback Edition, 2021, Penguin Random House, New York, p 101, (Winner of the National Jewish book award).

[2]           Op Cit, Weiss, p 101


Re: DSA campism

hari kumar
 

Dear Michael: 
I certainly (as always) respect your viewpoint. But perhaps you are just congenitally incapable of being Machievellian
(?Spelling!).
But seriously, why would you think the USA has learnt that "the US overreach in Iraq and Afghanistan has created a great reluctance --- not the least among the US "warrior" class --- to use US military might to expand"?

I mean - where does the logic of imperial might enter into that? And do you really think that Biden-Pentagon-Wall St can be credited with for-going profit? 

I might suggest an alternate hypothesis - 'proof' will be for historians able finally to get at archives - after certainly both you and I can serve our rightful role as fodder for earthworms:
i) The Minsk Treaty was repetitively stalled, largely by Zelensky. I am unsure how much France & Germany tried to 'persuade' him - but I suspect they did try to do that.
ii) Perhaps the USA urged Z on, more than possible. or equally - perhaps the USA is not the only one who finds Zelensky and the fascist Western Ukraine factions easy to persuade. 
iii) The 8 years of waiting - was calculated to break Putin's nerve. It did. 
iv) Repetitively saying "The USA will not enter" - made it an inviting bear-trap for Putin.  
v) Putin walked into an inferno as - a war of invasion will stir a national unity as it did in Iraq (vs the USA) and Afghanistan (vs Russia).
vi) Even Germany came off the fence (as did Sweden) and now - one open question perhaps is whether having fallen into the trap - regime change inside the USSR will actually happen.
vii) I think it likely will not, I suspect that finally - a 'negotiated peace" will come about - and Ukraine will be 'neutralised'. But - at the expense of the NATO-USA-EU forces having tied a rope around Putin's Russia: militarily, and economically. 

Just for what it is worth - probably wrong... 
Anyway Michael - I do not think that imperialism can 'learn' in the way you suggest.  

Be well Michael, 

Hari


Re: Les: Rule no 1 - is waht?

Les Schaffer
 

Nota bene

Your mail program may show this instead,.see below. In which case the rules may be hidden in the quoted text.


Re: Les: Rule no 1 - is waht?

Les Schaffer
 

:-)   thank you for honesty Hari

Look ALL THE WAY DOWN at the bottom of this email, it says:

POSTING RULES & NOTES
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.

Les



On Tue, Mar 1, 2022, 6:06 PM hari kumar <hari6.kumar@...> wrote:

Sorry Les: But - what is it? 

Bears repetition for people like me who cannot recall; & do not know where to look.
Sorry,
H



Les: Rule no 1 - is waht?

hari kumar
 

Sorry Les: But - what is it? 

Bears repetition for people like me who cannot recall; & do not know where to look.
Sorry,
H


Re: DSA campism

hari kumar
 

Cort: yes correct. But the connection with the USA is even worse, *also* Biden and his crew - see at:
http://ml-today.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/danse.pdf
Citing: Chris Kaspar de Ploeg ‘Ukraine in the Crossfire”; Atlanta GA, 2017; at referenced ages;
"Throughout this next process as Bloomberg reported USA state presence – including then USA Vice-President Joe Biden and US ambassador Pyatt in Ukraine as: “Americans are highly visible in the Ukranian political process. The US Embassy in Kiev is a center of power, and Ukranian politicians openly talk of appointments and dismissals being vetted by US Ambassador Pyatt and even Vice-President Joe Biden”. 13 Three months after Yanukovich was ousted, Hunter Biden (son of the US vice-president) joined the board of Burisma Holdings, Ukraine’s largest gas producer. 14 Attacks on the Ukrainian economic independence of the EU and the USA were far more targeted at the industrialised Eastern part (the Russian) rather than at the agricultural Eastern (proWestern Polish) side. 15"

Hari


Re: DSA campism

Les Schaffer
 

And I'm going to rouse the ghost of Lou Proyect. I'm putting Brad on moderation until he nails rule #1. Similar for others. With the intensity on the threads now it's time for comrades to pay attention to how they deliver their views to the list.


Les


On Tue, Mar 1, 2022, 5:41 PM Bradley Mayer <blmayer062@...> wrote:
In re DSA, by "campism" I do not mean a formal ideological position, but a "campism in effect".  As John Reimann (who surely has more first-hand experience of a negative sort) indicated, the low level of political discussion in DSA virtually guarantees an impressionism pushed and shoved by events.  Now Putin has given a big shove, so they'll likely drift into pro-NATO campism.  Being a "socialist" is no guarantee against social-chauvinism or social-imperialism of any camp.  So Putin rouses the ghosts of Lenin! 



Chomsky on Ukraine

Andrew Stewart
 


Re: DSA campism

Bradley Mayer
 

In re DSA, by "campism" I do not mean a formal ideological position, but a "campism in effect".  As John Reimann (who surely has more first-hand experience of a negative sort) indicated, the low level of political discussion in DSA virtually guarantees an impressionism pushed and shoved by events.  Now Putin has given a big shove, so they'll likely drift into pro-NATO campism.  Being a "socialist" is no guarantee against social-chauvinism or social-imperialism of any camp.  So Putin rouses the ghosts of Lenin! 

On Tue, Mar 1, 2022 at 12:05 PM Jerry Monaco <monacojerry@...> wrote:
No doubt Russia has allies. My point if you read it is that any person who claims to be a socialist allies with Putin negates that claim. But the same is true of anybody who claims to be a socialist and allies with the United States and NATO. 

There is no "third camp" in this position. I am simply for the interests of the working class and all of the oppressed. And siding with the United States is self-defeating. Siding with Putin's Rusdia is stupid. 

The question I have is how does a radical socialist contain and defeat U.S. imperialism and oppose the Putin aggressors and his corrupt oligarchs... without giving support to the Ukrainian oligarchs? 

How?

JM

On Tue, Mar 1, 2022, 14:37 Cort Greene <cort.greene@...> wrote:
Russia does have allies including home gown forces from Russia; skinhead groups,  neo nazis organizations, military veterans organizations and Cossack entities and several different varieties of ultra nationalist groups along the Wagner Group, a modern military  with troops from Belarus and Chechnya. There have been reports that Kazakhstan (everyone must have forgotten about Russia's Police Action there in January 2022, almost 6 weeks ago), one of Russia's closest allies and a southern neighbor (many problems on their southern border also), is denying a request for its troops to join the offensive in Ukraine and have refused to recognize the breakaway republics. 

And there is an North American connection to Ukraine that few talk about, that Trump's campaign manager, Paul Manafort (long time Republican operative and who owns a lobbing firm with Roger Stone since 1980, Trump pardoned both)  he was an advisor and campaign manager (from 2004 until 2014) to Viktor Yanukovych former Ukraine president and oligarch and the Party of Regions (had an affiliation with United Russia Party ). 


Calling Both Sides 'Spoiled' in Baseball Lockout Ignores How Owners Forced Labor War

Andrew Stewart
 



Best regards,
Andrew Stewart

Begin forwarded message:

From: FAIR <fair@...>
Date: March 1, 2022 at 5:09:07 PM EST
To: hasc.warrior.stew@...
Subject: Calling Both Sides 'Spoiled' in Baseball Lockout Ignores How Owners Forced Labor War
Reply-To: FAIR <fair@...>




Re: workers, the "working class," and working class cultures

John A Imani
 

Comrades,

I had dropped out of this conversation as I had made my points.  Now comes (again) this person who acts as a 7 year old who has to have the last word; who makes imagined assertions about what a comrade is and/or what he has done; who persists no matter how incorrect his views are; and is still on this listserv in spite of the language that he uses against comrades:

<<If Professor Masko didn't say that the owner-operators are working-class, Imani, Stewart, and Lause did--in Imani's case with a brow of thunder and a barrage of piecemeal quotes from Marx.>>

Cdes Stewart an Lause are more than able to explain their own  positions with clarity and without resorting to the use of insult as argument as the writer of the just above cannot seem to prevent himself from doing.  I proceed with my response as an exposition of the theory of class as being determined by the elements of value in the commodity that one brings to market:

1.) if the trucker does not own the truck but operates at a given wage v negotiated prior to being hired--in the wage-'bargain'--then he is a wage-worker.  And if the owner of the truck extracts surplus-value s from the trucker's labor l then again that trucker is a wage-worker.  The value of the worker's commodity, labor-power, is his wage v.  The value added by his labor is l.  From this latter, the owner of the truck extracts surplus-value (by way of the wage-'bargain' that entitles him to) all value added by labor above this wage s.  l - v = s:  

"We shall assume that he is a mere wage-labourer, even one of the better paid, for all the difference it makes. Whatever his pay, as a wage-labourer he works part of his time for nothing.” https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1885-c2/ch06.htm 

The underlined phrase in the cite is here used as it also applies to Kalosar's previous contention that there is a class difference between the owner-operator of a Peterbilt and one who owns his own tools c and makes his living with his own hands l.  The value of both 's commodities is c + l.  They are both independent workers (as further defined just below.)

2.)  I never said without further explanation that owner-operators are "working class".  They are not as I have explained time and again.  However, they are workers.  If the trucker is owner/operator without owning any other truck--and thus, not able to hire any working class driver from which he could steal surplus-value--then the value of his commodity is c + l (with c being his constant capital (truck, tools, gas, etc)) and l being his total labor inputted into the ferrying of goods from this place to that.  As he owns his own means of production (whatever their size so long as they enable him to make a living) c he does not work for any surplus-value extracting capitalist.  This worker is then in the class of Independent Workers:

"Political economy confuses on principle two very different kinds of private property, of which one rests on the producers' own labor, the other on the employment of the labor of others." Vol 1 Chap XXXIII. https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/ch33.htm

3.)  Should one own not one truck c but several C that he can then hire wage-workers V to operate the others, he is then he is able to extract surplus-value S from the labors L of his workers.  Thus the value of his product consist of two parts: the first is the value added by himself; while the second is the value added by his workers.  The first part (the independent worker part) is equal to C + l where C is his total constant capital (trucks, fuel, etc) and l is the value-added by himself. 

The second part (the bourgeois part) is the value added by his workers labor L which consists of the workers laboring part of the time, necessary labor V and part of the time for the capitalist S, i.e. L = V + S.  The value of this person's commodity is thus (C + l) + (L = V + S) which is the gross value of this worker/capitalist, this petit-bourgeois' product.  C is his total constant capital (trucks, fuels, uniforms, etc), l is the value added by himself as worker, V is the total wage-bill for the workforce and S is the total surplus-value gained by having the workforce labor beyond the time during which the value of their labors is recreated.

This worker/capitalist's net (minus the constant capital C and the wage-worker's wage V) is thus l + S, i.e. the value added by his own labor l added to the surplus value S extracted from the wage-worker's labor.  This person is then the petit-bourgeois:

"Of course he (the capitalist) can, like his labourer, take to work himself, participate directly in the process of production, but he is then only a hybrid between capitalist and labourer, a ‘small master’.” Marx. Capital (Vol 1) p308 https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/ch11.htm

4.)  Should this petit-bourgeois accumulate enough capital so as to own as many trucks C and hire as many men V as necessary to profitably operate them, then the result of this is that the total surplus-value S extracted is large enough for the capitalist to cease to have to operate as a worker of any sort and live entirely on the labor L of others. he is now a full-fledged bourgeois:

“...capitalist production requires an individual capital big enough to employ a fairly large number of workers at a time; only when he himself is wholly released from labour does the employer of labour become a full-grown capitalist.” Engels. “Synopsis of Capital” (Vol 1.) Chap 4. Sec 2.

http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/1868-syn/ch04.htm


In sum these then are the 4 classes of which 3 are workers while 2 are capitalist (sic): 

v                                     wage worker-only owns his own labor-power v

c + l                                independent worker-owns his own means of production c but works only for himself l                                              with no hired labor
                                     
(C + l) + (L = V + S)         petit bourgeois worker/capitalist who works l alongside but owns enough constant                                            capital  C to hire workers V whose labor L yields surplus-value S 
                                              
C +( L =  V + S)            bourgeois capitalist-who owns major means of production C operated solely by hired                                       labor L (= V + S) from which he extracts surplus-value
                                   
As for me allegedly  bringing a << barrage of piecemeal quotes from Marx>>.  Every single cite from Marx I gave was relevant (and there are many more pertaining to these questions) and I invite this (I am trying hard not to use the language (i.e. insults) that this person, who flips off at the mouth, has used on this list time and again when referring to comrades). 

This is a Marxist website and I challenge Kalosar to cite one quote (in its relevant context) from Marx that I used incorrectly.  While I have cited time and again to back my contentions.  And since this is a Marxist listserv I challenge this (I give up trying to be nice) cretin to bring cites from Marx to back up his bullshit unfounded assertions.

JAI


The past isn't dead. It's not even past.

gilschaeffer82@...
 

In a continuing effort to distinguish explanation from justification, I offer this history lesson for you reading pleasure.

The Consequences of Humiliating Russia


Re: DSA campism

Jerry Monaco
 

No doubt Russia has allies. My point if you read it is that any person who claims to be a socialist allies with Putin negates that claim. But the same is true of anybody who claims to be a socialist and allies with the United States and NATO. 

There is no "third camp" in this position. I am simply for the interests of the working class and all of the oppressed. And siding with the United States is self-defeating. Siding with Putin's Rusdia is stupid. 

The question I have is how does a radical socialist contain and defeat U.S. imperialism and oppose the Putin aggressors and his corrupt oligarchs... without giving support to the Ukrainian oligarchs? 

How?

JM

On Tue, Mar 1, 2022, 14:37 Cort Greene <cort.greene@...> wrote:
Russia does have allies including home gown forces from Russia; skinhead groups,  neo nazis organizations, military veterans organizations and Cossack entities and several different varieties of ultra nationalist groups along the Wagner Group, a modern military  with troops from Belarus and Chechnya. There have been reports that Kazakhstan (everyone must have forgotten about Russia's Police Action there in January 2022, almost 6 weeks ago), one of Russia's closest allies and a southern neighbor (many problems on their southern border also), is denying a request for its troops to join the offensive in Ukraine and have refused to recognize the breakaway republics. 

And there is an North American connection to Ukraine that few talk about, that Trump's campaign manager, Paul Manafort (long time Republican operative and who owns a lobbing firm with Roger Stone since 1980, Trump pardoned both)  he was an advisor and campaign manager (from 2004 until 2014) to Viktor Yanukovych former Ukraine president and oligarch and the Party of Regions (had an affiliation with United Russia Party ). 


A voice of the anti-war movement from within Ukraine

Charles Keener
 

Ukrainian Pacifist in Kyiv: Reckless Militarization Led to This War. All Sides Must Recommit to Peace | Democracy Now!

We go to Kyiv to speak with Yurii Sheliazhenko, executive secretary of the Ukrainian Pacifist Movement, who says “support of Ukraine in the West is mainly military support” and reports that his country “focuses on warfare and almost ignores nonviolent resistance to war.” He also discusses Zelensky’s response to the crisis, the European Union’s approval of Ukraine’s emergency application, and whether he plans to leave the war-torn city of Kyiv soon.
 Yurii is the executive secretary of the Ukrainian Pacifist Movement, board member of the European Bureau for Conscientious Objection, also member of the board of directors at World BEYOND War and research associate at KROK University in Kyiv, Ukraine.

5681 - 5700 of 20522