Re: [Marxism] Alan Woods versus James Petras

[Gary MacLennan <gary.maclennan1@xxxxxxxxx>]

I agree with most of Woods critique of Petras.  However I am inclined to
think that he has over read the situation in Iran when he says that the
REVOLUTION has begun. I think it was Fred who described such thinking as
:"hallucinatory" and that seems more realistic an assessment to me.  However
I have clipped a piece from Woods' article when he characterizes the Iranian
state:  Here it is:

Woods: "The government of Iran is not a progressive pro-working class
government but a reactionary theocratic dictatorship, which has
systematically repressed the workers’ movement, denied trade union rights,
arrested, tortured and executed trade union activists, for decades."

What strikes me about the above is the absence of any reference to the often
barbaric treatment of women, other religious groups, youth, and gays.  It
might seem to some that I am simply genuflecting here towards political
correctness.  Not so; we surely need to acknowledge that  Woods'
formulations are much too narrow. They betray for me the limited
emancipatory potential of a certain type of Marxism. "Economistic" I think
would be the correct word to describe what Woods has put forward.  I
contrast that with the Angry Arab's (As'ad Khalil) formulations.  He
consistently raises women's & gay issues and the treatment of ethnic
minorities.  But then he now describes himself as an anarchist.

We urgently need to insist on the emancipatory potential of Marxism.
Otherwise we leave the field open to the likes of the Zionists who have been
advertising Israel as a haven for gays compared to Iran.

regards

Gary

regards

Gary
________________________________________________
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