ZJW
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Michael Roberts: ‘Lives or livelihoods?’:
Abolition of the wage-labor system through Covid-19, according to Jehu Eaves:
and a few days before that:<Socialism, Communism, Association—A rose by another name> contains:‘[…] he imagines ‘an association of free men (<i>sic</i>), working […]’What Marx wrote was ‘Verein freier Menschen’– association of free persons, *not* ‘Verein freier Männer’ – association of free men. (The German differentiation between ‘Mensch’ and ‘Mann’ is found throughout Germanic languages other than English.)Old-fashioned translations into English may use ‘of men’, but that is no reason to go on quoting it, then adding ‘[sic]’.Perhaps, with the agreement of the writer, ‘men’ can be corrected to ‘persons’ (or ‘individuals’?) in the internet edition of SS?Otherwise, a very fine article. of course.Explain the difference between co-ops and ‘communes’. ( Is the idea that the communes are food-producing and can be (relatively) autarkic?? )
Maybe nothing very new here, but …map:Middle East Eye: ‘REVEALED: Trump’s ‘deal of the century’ map for a future Palestine, Israel’:Connection with IHRA:And Counter Currents: ‘Zionism’s mass psychosis is not Israel’s private affair’:excerpt:‘IHRA balances a dizzying mix of logic schisms. The Israeli state is the self-determination of Jews as Jews, but it is antisemitic to say that Jews favor Israel over their own nation, and it is also antisemitic to call Israel’s ethnic nationalism a racist endeavor; but then it is antisemitic to deny Israel as an ethnic nationalist state, yet it is also antisemitic to note any comparison between Israel and Nazism, no matter what Israel may ever do. Israeli citizenship offers further immunity under IHRA, but then it is antisemitic to hold Jews as a people responsible for what the Israeli state does — well, except for Zionism, which explicitly makes Jews the doers of what the Israeli state does — but then it is antisemitic to point this out.’I don’t remember a US presidential election in which the ‘anarchist’ Chomsky did not call for voting for whichever would-be lesser-of-the-two-evils Democrat was running.
Kliman is on his same old rails, not off them. In 2016 he supported voting for Clinton.
The following quote from the CWO ( https://bit.ly/37jcIBT ) on October 2016:
‘All of which demonstrates that a sound analysis of the failings of capitalism is not enough if not accompanied by a defence of revolutionary politics and the recognition that communism is not just a nice version of capitalism but an entirely new mode of production in which the law of value has been abolished […] and society is moneyless. Roberts is not the first economist who has done useful work in defending the Marxist critique of capitalism yet does not link this to a revolutionary political programme. Even today Andrew Kliman has a similar critique of the the system to Roberts and ourselves (using a slightly different calculation) but as a member of the Marxist-Humanist Initiative he is supporting a “lesser evil” vote for Clinton in the US election. The temptation to be drawn onto the agenda set by the bourgeoisie is too great, even for those who should be theoretically armed to oppose it. ‘I hope what I just posted is readable. The spaces I put between paragraphs all vanished. I see no editing function to make use of. (Unlike on the old forum, I think.)
‘ Is this something we should insist on being included in?’
Yes!
By the way, the Northite Trots (WSWS/’Socialist Equality Party’) are standing candidates:
More of the same:
To me, the notion of ‘countries’ exploiting other ‘countries’ through ‘transfer’ of surplus value is the leftist concomitant to the right-wing ‘pro-workerist’ claim (like with Trump) that the working class of country X (say, the US) are ‘exploited’ by country Y (say, China) through ‘unequal’ trading relations.
Can we have an article in the SS — or why not a pamphlet? — dealing with both of these ideologies at the same time? It could be titled ‘Anti-socialist notions of exploitation’, or something catchy like that.
Or has it already been covered? (Where?)
The US satiro-ironist CW Hopkins on the NYT and Hillary’s Clinton’s recent attacks on the anti-warish Democrat presidential candidate T. Gabbard (as a ‘Russian asset’ or the like):
(And just as alanjjohnstone says, the name of this thread should be changed.)
New book by Piketty. Review by Michael Roberts:
