[Fwd: Re: Unfortunately for us, Wordsworth lived in better times]

["bob brown" <vacirca@xxxxxxxxx>]

  In answer to your "question" mark, present-day serbian,albanian, kosovan,
 croatian, russian,taliban, white american, iranian "nationalism" (and last
 but not least NATO euro-nationalism) have all proven themselves to be
mortal enemies of women. Abstract disquisitions on the historical
progressivenessor not of this or that nationalism are beside the point here,
as are katha's politics. there is overwhelming , documented evidence of a
world-wide holocaust being conducted against women world-wide by gangs of
fascist menevery where.the contagion of male violence against women is
EVERYWHERE,  in NYC, just last sunday (see nytimes 6/12) large roving gangs
of young men just sexually attacked 7-8 women at random in central park in
broad daylight  while police did nothing. there is no evidence to indicate
that Serbian, croatian, bosnian, and albanian men are any different from the
rest of today's male culture. to believe you we'd have to also believe that
the women's movements of a dozen countries are working for the CIA and
fabricating lies about serbian men's mass atrocities against bosnian and
kosovan and croatian women. liberal-baiting katha is a cheap cop out. if
anyone is a collaborationist
 its you. bob brown


>>From: "Mark Jones" <jones118@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>To: "M-Fem@csf. colorado. edu" <M-Fem@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>Subject: RE: [Fwd: Re: Unfortunately for us, Wordsworth lived in better times]
>>Date: Mon, Jun 12, 2000, 1:41 PM
>>
>
>> Katha, it is not pointful to attribute to me things I have not said, unless
>> your only purpose is to engage in mortal combat with figments of your own
>> imagination. I haven't said anything one way or the other about Serbia's
>> defence of specific values or principles.
>>
>> You say "Nationalism is the enemy -- on all sides". This begs some
>> questions. What is this enemy, Nationalism-in-general, a kind of ghost in
>> the historical machinery? Is all nationalism everywhere and at all times
>> 'the enemy'? The *idea* of nationalism is the enemy? You surely don't mean
>> that. What you mean is, it's OK to support American nationalism when the
>> enemy is Hitler (I hope you mean that anyway). It's not OK to support
>> Serbian nationalism. And it's not OK to support Nato nationalism. You are
>> equally opposed to both things. They are equally abhorrent to you. Actually,
>> Serbian nationalism is even worse than Nato nationalism, yes? In any case,
>> the answer to human trafficking from the east is *to oppose all forms of
>> nationalism, even-handedly*. And since you oppose all nationalism, it's
>> enough to say that and to be done with the specifics of Nato nationalism,
>> and the moral disorders it visits upon its client states and its cowed
>> former enemies, yes? You have nothing to say about any of that, because you
>> are opposed to 'all nationalism everywhere'. We do not need to look any
>> closer. There are no possible questions which can be asked about the forces
>> and narratives that constitute any particular nationalism, especially
>> western nationalism, or how nationalism enables/is entailed by the modern
>> world system, or whether some nations are oppressors and other victims, and
>> others are both, sometimes at the same time, and how we must deal with the
>> reality that a nation can be both oppressor and victim, and still exist as a
>> nation and enjoy no less legitimacy than others, which are only oppressors,
>> or only victims. Before making any statements about 'nationalism in general'
>> we should think about these kidns of specifics.
>>
>> In *practice* we should oppose things that our opposition makes some
>> difference to. It's more sensible to act where we have a chance to change
>> something than just tilt at (Serbian) windmills. So we might agree to oppose
>> the failures and inadequacies of our own states, where we have some say,
>> even if only the right to vote or persuade others to vote, yes? Surely it is
>> pointful for us to *also* campaign about the near-silence and seeming
>> inactivity of Nato government's law enforcement agencies and criminal
>> justice systems about the tide of wretched enslaved humanity being brought
>> like cattle from places like Kosovo to the west? But no, I don't think you
>> think so.
>>
>> I'm gonna have to unsub, I have too much work to do and I don't think we
>> have much chance of reasoned debate. Carrol, remind me how to unsub from
>> here?
>>
>>
>> Mark Jones
>> http://www.egroups.com/group/CrashList
>>
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: m-fem-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> [mailto:m-fem-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Katha Pollitt
>>> Sent: 12 June 2000 18:44
>>> To: M-Fem@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Subject: [Fwd: Re: Unfortunately for us, Wordsworth lived in better
>>> times]
>>>
>>>
>>> Mark Jones wrote:
>>> >
>>>
>>> > When I said you are a Nato-supporter this was hotly denied,
>>> even by yourself
>>> > I think. But what you do when you call upon Serb/Yugoslav men
>>> to deser tis
>>> > to give aid and comfort to Nato.
>>>
>>>   I would be interested  to know if others on this also think that men
>>> who refuse to fight in the Serbian Army are  giving "aid and comfort to
>>> Nato," fostering forced trafficking of women, contributing to the ruin
>>> of Eatern Europe and all the rest.  I am also interested in people's
>>> thoughts on the Serbian peace movement, the Women in Black and other
>>> opponents of Milosevic. Are they traitors to the cause of
>>> anti-imperialism, gender equality, and the other things mark argues
>>> Serbia is defending? I think those people are heroes, along with their
>>> Croatian, Bosnian and Kosovan counterparts. Nationalism is the enemy --
>>> on all sides.
>>>
>>> Katha
>>>
>>