ZJW
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
In this recent article involving sociologically-significant gradiations of skin pigmentation in Sudan and environs can be seen a reference to the word ‘abid’ as used as term of racist abuse: light skinned toward the darker skinned, and darker skinned toward the still darker skinned. (Arabs toward non-Arabs, and also among Arabs themselves.): https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/black-lives-matter-sudan-200813141537238.html
That site whose link I gave in the earlier post — nonsite.org — reflects the views of Adolph Reed and co.
Yesterday in the New York Times there was an article about Reed, with the title ‘A Black Marxist Scholar Wanted to Talk About Race. It Ignited a Fury’ and the subtitle ‘The cancellation of a speech reflects an intense debate on the left: Is racism the primary problem in America today, or the outgrowth of a system that oppresses all poor people?’: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/14/us/adolph-reed-controversy.html
Cf. At the bottom of this page the dissenting comment from ‘Stavos’, an enemy of unnecessary frugality:
https://www.leftcom.org/en/articles/2015-10-07/notes-on-the-question-of-the-transition-to-communism
Same word: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abd_(Arabic)
(edit)
Also: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%D8%B9%D8%A8%D8%AF#Arabic
There are various articles here showing (although from a socdem/reformist perspective) the class-divisive capitalist-compliant nature of BLM-ism: https://nonsite.org/race-class-blmLooking at the situation in the US it seems that neo-leftism ultimately sets its sights on communitarian egalitarianism, such that, taken to a logical conclusion, the various IdPol demographic categories would obligatorily be represented in government and other public bodies in proportion to their respective weights in the population. Not only monetary compensations awarded to entire ‘communities’ are a possibility. It is also possible that in the interests of just historical compensation that the non-‘POC’ representation-proportion would be downgraded to one degree or another*. The result: the exact same capitalism as before, but with a redistribution of genealogically-coded power throughout the hierarchies of state and economy**. And this would be called ‘justice’. ‘* Cf positive descrimination / affirmative action / quota systems in Tsarist Russia (against number of Jews in universities) / anti-non-Malay employment-measures in Malaysia.** Especially if the system were somehow extended to the private-sector economy, a more complex affair.To say that this is class-divisive is an understatement. And People like Kevin McDonald (not the film director!) would welcome such tendencies — including just the ongoing emotionalist cancelism over symbols). For him and his ilk: at last a way to bring the stupidly liberal-minded White Race, kicking and screaming, to its senses!WSWS: ‘UK Labour leader Keir Starmer uses bogus anti-Semitism accusation to sack Rebecca Long-Bailey’:
Replying to several posts above:1) DJP: My apologies! Bad memory!2) Stuart: What you say rather misses the point doesn’t it? If you had not gone and …. de-remembered(?) what you must have known from your years in the SPGB, then no one would be remonstrating with you about presenting a universe in which the choices are limited to central planning vs the market, and there would be no need for you to be writing to convey high-minded sentiments to ex-comrades. Perhaps it would be more fitting to speak of substantive matters, eh?, such as for example Robbo’s fourth paragraph, here: https://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/forum/topic/two-ex-socialists-go-funny/#post-2038133) ALB wrote: ‘In fact a comparison of the two texts suggests that Binay Sarkar had a copy of L.L. Men’s pamphlet in front of him when he wrote that chapter, ‘Yes indeed. I didn’t want to clutter up the matter with pettiness (?) so did not mention that Sarkar’s earlier ‘The Bolshevik coup d’etat in Russia 1917 – 1921’ https://www.academia.edu/7730770/The_Bolshevik_coup_detat_in_Russia_1917_-_1921 (which was written right during or right after his break with left-communism) not only has has similar argument about ‘war communism’ as made as in the more recent Sarkar article but at that time he had the good manners at one point to quote LLM by name.4) To no one in particular: I hope that if there is further discussion of the LLM book (Robbo’s contribution for example), the focus will be on what LLM says about ‘war communism’. These other things: what left-communists …. council-communists … anarchists …. and others thought was possible or not in 1917, and what they think of the SPGB, these are old, much discussed debated topics.Robbo —Is the version of The “Economic Calculation” Controversy that you recently posted to Dissident Voice ( https://dissidentvoice.org/2020/03/the-economic-calculation-controversy ),
which the tireless jondwhite has even more recently posted as PDF on libcom (https://libcom.org/files/The_Economic_Calculation_Controversy_Dissident_Voice.pdf ) the same as what you published under the same title in Common Voice in 2005, or is it revised? A lazy question. I have not read the new (?) one but from looking at scattered sentences it seems to be identical. If changes have been made (I mean of content, not phrasing etc),of what nature are they?Robbo — Given that you used to write things there (your thread https://libcom.org/forums/thought/economic-calculation-argument which you began in 2007 and seem to have abandoned in 2010 even though others unsatisfactorily continued it in your absence until 2014), is it reasonable to assume that you still look at libcom from time to time, and saw https://libcom.org/library/ll-men-two-texts-defining-communist-programme, and saw my note (second post under it)?I would like to ask what you think of LLM’s demolition of the myth of ‘war “communism” ‘ vs that of Binay Sarkar. (I find the latter’s nearly incomprehensible.)If I am polluting this thread with off-topic content, a moderator will please move this post elsewhere.What a tragic line of development for SW. Something to this effect: Gilles Dauvé-influenced Watkins/Flynn “communist faction” (was that the name?) within the SPGB (That’s when he first came to my attention.) Leaves party. Becomes Chris Knight supporter. Rejoins party (no longer espousing heterodox views). Leaves party a second time very shortly after just having very zealously defended the pamphlet “What’s Wrong with using Parliament?” on the CWO site (here: https://www.leftcom.org/en/articles/2011-04-17/what%E2%80%99s-wrong-with-the-spgb) ! Becomes a supporter of Left Unity. And finally, this!!He did great interviews with Mattick and with Kliman, and as Alan points out was a very good writer.Paul Mattick: ‘Their Money or Your Life’: https://brooklynrail.org/2020/05/field-notes/Their-Money-or-Your-LifeAnti-mainstream view (and without conspiracy theory):
And there are two ‘Chris Wright’s. There is that dumb one, and there is also this very good one: https://libcom.org/library/stupid-regulators-greedy-financiers-or-business-usual-chris-wright
