Re: [A-List] Paul (R-TX) Speech: Dollar Hegemony - Texas and Marxism

[Waistline2@xxxxxxx]

>>When I first used the term on several discussion lists, I was  rebuffed
by many American economists as being anti-US. I officially coined  the
term "dollar hegemony" in 2002 on the Internet with an article: US
Dollar Hegemony has got to go.
_http://www.atimes.com/global-econ/DD11Dj01.html_
(http://www.atimes.com/global-econ/DD11Dj01.html)

The term now is widely used and its gratifying to see that it has
finally made it onto the floor of Congress.

Henry C.K. Liu<<


Comment

It is going to take me some time to place Representative Ron Paul comments
in a concrete and historically specific political context as real politics . .
.  in real time. Real time means the fight brewing in the citadel of bourgeois
 political America at this moment. I am roughly five years behind the curve
that  is actual Texas politics, as the actors see politics and how they respond
daily  and hourly. I intent to cover this time frame in 60 days. Although I
am very  close to real time activity. It has taken a full two years since
moving to  Texas.

Texas is really another country with a majority of nonwhite  peoples with an
influential segment speaking Spanish as a primary language. To  say Texas is
another country means a more than less historically distinct  economic and
social formation within the multinational state of the United  States of North
America.

Here we are faced with the National Factor in a profound manner, even  though
90% of American Marxism during the past 89 years have rejected Lenin's
theory premise of the national question as applicable to America. In its place  are
various theories of race.

George W. Bush is not a simple and ignorant man by any stretch of the
imagination. Although a representative of a class, he is the living  personification
of a historically distinct body politics that evolved from the  specifics of
class relations in America prior to our Civil War.

First things first. Henry's economic writings are more accurate  than
anything I have encountered over the past decade or so. It is fitting and
authenticates his accuracy that concepts peculiar to his specific formulation of  issues
enter into popular usage. Henry did not invent the term "fiat currency"
"debt instrument of national governments," but their penetration through the
bourgeois intellegencia into the intellectual sector of the proletariat and
through them back to the bourgeois intellegencia, which is the actual signal
process of how to formulate a broad political issue, should  properly be awarded to
him.

When the lowest strata of the world proletariat begins to speak of dollar
hegemony we will better understand an important side of our practical activity.
When a dude in Rwanda or Ethiopia begins to say, "I am tired of this stinking
 dollar hegemony" in unison with Chavez actions, we will know why and smile.

All political struggle is fought as an expression of polarity of which no
one can remove themselves. Defend of China does not mean one must commit to  the
policy of a state or party policy. It is not like I can pinpoint out of 1.3
billion people in China, who the communists are, or for that matter how they
see  the immediate geopolitical needs. I can't figure out what my damn wife is
going to do next.

We are going to win in the short and long run  but the form of struggle
unfolding in America has no precedent. At this stage we  show keep in mind how the
transfer of power took place in the Soviet Union as  the counterrevolutionary
insurrection and why a man such as Putin comes to the  fore. Even
revolutionary Chavez expresses a "thing" characteristic of the  splitting of the state and
its political polarization.

Given the air of Northern Yankee chauvinism, dominating America since the
Civil War, in cohorts with Black Belt (Southern) fascism - (real fascism as a
political form of rule),
"We" forget that America in all its economic,  social, cultural and political
traditions was, in its origins a Southern  country. This pre-Civil War
America existed and its existence is indisputable  and it was governed by a Southern
Oligarchy - Southern planters, since its  founding.

Texas is not a Northern "state," or a Midwest "state."  Texas is also very
big . . . real big. How big? Texas toast is the size of 4  slices of regular
toast for Christ sake. The second largest state of the United  States in
population, Texas is the second largest land area, after Alaska.  Bigger than Germany,
Texas could contain within its territory all of the New  England States, New
York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Ohio,  Kentucky and the
District of Columbia. Within the border of Texas three regions  of the North
American continent meet: the South, the Plains, and the Southwest.

The economic, social, political and wealth core of Texas has  always been
east Texas. East Texas is the western most extension of the Deep  South or what
is called the Black Belt nation. The land of cotton. I swear. It  has never
been different.

Texas has four major nationality groups  or what in African would be called
Advanced National Groups or in the old Soviet  terms "nationality" or in
American speak "ethnic races" or "modern tribes" with  "tribes in quotes because
these are not pre-capitalist social formations.

1). Tejanos (Mexican-Texans and not "Mexican Americans" because  America is
and always have been a prison of nations). The Tejanos are not  Chicano, which
is a different social formation of the Southwest proper.

2). What is part of the Anglo-American people in general but is in  its
essence an Anglo-Celtic Southern.

3). A historic German  community who imparted to Texas and believe it or not
America as a whole, modern  concepts of bourgeois democracy, rather than the
slave democracy of the Slave  Oligarchy.

4). Then you have the African American people, who  began their evolution as
a people in correspondence with the emergence of the  Black Belt as a distinct
sociological entity.  I say distinct sociological  entity rather than a
nation-state because the state that was defeated and  dismantled was the
Confederate States of America.

The Native  American old nations, such as the Cherokees, Comanches, and
Apaches were small  and quickly defeated and deported.

The new proletariat or the communist sector of the proletariat cuts across
all these groupings, with a very large group fighting on the basis of the
language question. And I can barely speak English.

To summarize  the history of Texas from 1836 until the 1960s in one sentence:
the largest  Advanced National Group is the Anglo American group, which is
really different  from the Anglo American groupings of the New England States,
hence Anglo-Celtic  Southerners, expropriated the Tejanos, deported the
Indians, crushed the Germans  and enslaved and exploited the blacks.

George W. is a fascist but  not in the terms defined by the Third
International. One must remember that  Texas was really a crucial part of Cotton economy
just as important as  Mississippi. Bush's fascism is American style and
America birthed the worlds  first fascist movement in the 1870s and by the 1890s
they had overthrown all the  bourgeois democratic governments of the
Reconstruction era.

The  opposition to Bush's rule from within Texas and the Americans body
politic is a  historical economic and political alignment. This polarization,
expressed in Rep  Ron Paul's speech is misunderstood and has been misunderstood, by
every  generation of communists in America and totally disregarded by
American Marxism,  due to their rejection of the brilliance of Marxism and the
National Question  and criminal blindness in the face of so-called Northern
bourgeois democracy.  The polarization is real. This is the environment of the real
time class  struggle.

History left it to the African American Marxists -  existing and thriving at
the very core of the most privileged sector of the  industrial classes, to
wage the 40 year nonstop slug fist - battle, to clarify  the road forward. We
have come full circle and one again faced our history enemy  - the slave masters
descendants.

Yes, dollar hegemony as fiat  money as the base of the financial
infrastructure does not convey and transfer  material value as exchange. Fiat money is a
political agreement enforced by  military might, but I leant this from Henry
not Mr. Paul, with all due respect.  The actual sector of the historical
bourgeois class that is George W. are brutal  gamblers who have brought the world
Texas Hold'em and Enron - gambling in the  financial architecture on an
indescribable level.

The world is undergoing a revolution in the mode of production. I learnt
this from the writings of Karl Marx. Yes, the subjective factors are important
and we are it, rather than our ideas about what we think about what we think.
The path forward is not through the industrial proletariat "whose hands are on
 production" and I learnt this through 30 years of lived experience at the
zenith  of the industrial proletariat and the industrial trade union movement.

Mr. Liu, won the right - in heated combat against a body of  Western Marxism,
to define the terms of engagement as a growing polarization  between wealth
and poverty world wide, based on this stage of development of  capitalist
accumulation. This right was won based on a practical living  experience at the
summit of money movement, intellectual capacity and the most  unrelenting battle
against the various champions of bourgeois democracy, no  matter what their
guise.

We - the grouping of Marxism from which I  evolved, take the right to define
the communist terms of engagement and seek no  ones approval. The path forward
is through the communist sector of the  proletariat and everything else is
just so much right wing Marxism and the  pathetic love of Western - bourgeois,
democracy. From time to time I am  going to do Texas for the A-List, as best I
can. What is needed are real  intellectuals but they are unable to step forth
due to bourgeois democratic  poisoning.

Damn Henry, its getting ready to be real tricky and I  think one might need
to be very careful about anything said from here out. I do  not mean fearful
but careful in presenting formulations that can take root in  the communist
sector of the proletariat.

Molotov said it a long  time ago and I am beginning to understand.

"All Road lead to  communism more or less."

What a day.

Melvin P.