[Marxism] Re: Marxism and Conspiracy

[Brian Shannon <brian_shannon@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sep 9, 2006, at 11:17 AM, Austin, Andrew wrote:

> All that to one side, here's what I think, and I base this on the  
> character of the counterarguments presented.  I think that some  
> (most?) Marxists believe that if they allow other Marxists to ask  
> rational questions of the official 9-11 account without calling  
> them "idiots" or "lunatics" that the enemies of Marxism will paint  
> Marxists as crazy.  Whether they admit it, or even whether they  
> realize it, it's something of a political-practical move to  
> distance the community from those whom the bourgeois authorities  
> and media would label crazy and thus avoid tarnishing the whole  
> community with the label.  "Let the right wingers believe in  
> conspiracy theories.  Marxists use structural analysis.  We can't  
> be accused of conspiracism."  (I am still trying to decide if the  
> cry is at least noble in its intention. Theoretically it's  
> impoverished because it leads to a type of functionalism when  
> practiced in the formulaic way it too often is in e-mail  
> discussions.)  In any case, I think we should realize that, for  
> many of our critics, we're already crazy.  Marxists believe the  
> entire capitalist system is premised on the systematic exploitation  
> of the working class - and everybody knows that's not true.  You  
> can't get any crazier than to believe that the good people who  
> bring us the American Dream are actually exploiting the people they  
> serve.  It's not like you could keep something like that a secret  
> if it were true.  We're crazy for believing that the US state makes  
> war for profit.  We're crazy when we say that the United States and  
> Israel engage in terrorism or that they ever act without at least  
> noble intentions.  But at least "we aren't so crazy that we would  
> doubt key elements of the event that the Bush administration has  
> used to justify the expansion of imperialism and the police state."

It is true that Marxists, often in argument within our own ranks, go  
back again and again to political economy and the basic structure of  
imperialism. I have been struck by this as I graze through the 14  
Trotsky miscellany. Great for the politics and falling asleep as  
well. Yet this does not prevent Marxists from also discussing these  
events on a historical or even emotional plane, which Trotsky also  
does, particularly in interviews with the bourgeois press. The  
article by Pikser, posted earlier today by dbachmozart, expressed in  
a different tone, is in line with what Marxists need to write. I  
don't think that the enemies of Marxism would paint this as crazy,  
although in their manipulated focus on what to do tomorrow they  
probably consider it irrelevant.

To that I say so what. If we were winning over the majority, there  
would even be this discussion. To admit that we are in a minority  
does not mean that we have to agree that everyone thinks those who  
are in a minority are crazy.

Brian Shannon




________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism