Re: [Marxism] Betancourt's halo [SIC] under spotlight

[Ruthless Critic of All that Exists <ok.president+nbsy@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 2:40 AM,  <Jscotlive@xxxxxxx> wrote:

> Ruthless:
>
> Marxists *must* get out of this habit of defending some entities
> merely  because imperialism attacks these entities. They *must* be
> criticized for  their failings, whether they are under attack by
> imperialism or not. That is  the only principled position for Marxists
> to take.
>
> Reply:
>
> Yes, we must get out of the habit of defending people being murdered,
> colonised, starved, immiserated, and ethnically cleansed.

Notice how JScotlive distorts. (S)he equates <refraining from
criticizing Hamas> with <defending Palestinians being oppressed>.

But the two are not the same. One can be vocal in critique of Hamas,
AND criticize Israeli oppression of Palestinians. In fact, that is the
principled position to take here.

While accommodating to imperialism is a clear and present danger for
Marxists, JScotlive vividly illustrates the opposite danger:
accommodating to religious zealots *merely* because the same religious
zealots are under attack from imperialists.

By the same arguments, Marxists would be reduced to supporting Obama
because, after all, Obama is attacked by the right. Surely one sees
the absurdity of this line of mislogical reasoning.

________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: 
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40archives.econ.utah.edu