From: Riccardo Bellofiore (riccardo.bellofiore@UNIBG.IT)
Date: Mon May 19 2003 - 03:53:31 EDT
At 12:24 +1000 19-05-2003, Nicola Taylor wrote: > > If Nicky wishes to appeal to our better instincts why >> doesn't she choose to condemn the fact of Koestler's rape of Mrs Foot, >> rather than his fiction? > > >I hope you are not suggesting that all great works of literature should be >dismissed if the 'moral' credentials of their authors are brought into >question? I agree complementely with Nicky. Just for fun. Not only literate are under attack. Sylos Labini wrote a long essay criticizing Marx because he was not a good moral person, he had a son with Helene Demuth, and he didn't recognized him ... and frankly, for what I know, Freddy (Engels) was to me much more a nice guy than Charlie, but theoretically I think the other way round. >The simple answer to your question is that Koestler's fiction is >interesting in the context of the current debate (in the sense that the >arguments of the book parallel the arguments in this forum, in favour and >against supporting the Castro regime). > >> Why have the protests against the death penalty not >> been seen before on this site by the same correspondents, when applied >> against the oppressed in the USA? > >Would you like to initiate a debate on the subject? I will be happy to >contribute since I share Riccardo's view: the death penalty (the most >violent form of state action against individuals) can NEVER be justified. sorry, but again this from Paul B. is not a very fair comment, and repeat the usual tic to answer criticism. I was, and am, against not only death penalty in the US (how could you thin otherwise, Paul?????????; do you want to open a forum? OK. do you want I sign a petition? wonderful!!!!!!!!!), I have signed all that I could for cancelling it. The problem is not only death pģenalty. I find Guantanamo something incredible, though of course is done to defend USA against terrorism (Bush says!). 2 millions people (or more) in jail. Do you really think I am in favour? Or that I would stay silent? And do you think criticism on Cuba is done from anybody on THIS list to support USA against Cuba? this is a very good instance of what I signalled some post ago. NO mutual respect. You have serious concerns. please take seriously the concerns of others. > >> If a discussion of imperialist violence and counteractions by oppressed > > countries has to be discussed, it must be done in public. counteractions by 'countries'. well, I do not like it (you can expect that from a Luxemburghian), and I repeat my argument, which here is the same as Koestler on means-ends. this way, btw, the counteraction is an error , for people, for countries, for anybody interested in something different than replicating the path of the past. there was a huge movement for peace in Italy (4 millions in Rome a few months ago). nobody was able to raise a serious challenge to the aggression against Cuba. because this kind of decvlaration REDUCE support rather than enhancing it. even from a Weberian point of view they are irrational. here the discussion is simple: what impedes to attack the USA for its aggression and criticising Cuba for its errors? nothing, to me. put yourself in any year in the XXth century. do you think that any of the socialist experiences were not attacked by imperialists? do we have to accept than whatever they did? if not, it's all that Nicky's reminded us acceptable for us? > This was the >> classic way to identify the real political positions of priests and >other >> ideologists who concealed self interest and reaction in moral lamentation >> and 'heavenly' appeals. It is not suprising that Castro is quoted on this >> site recently as attacking certain Marxists. > >I also am not surprised that Castro is attacking Marxists, or indeed anyone >who opposes him. Once a ruling elite begins on this road the list of >'enemies of the state' tends to grow... quite right. but may I signal to you Nicky this way of phrasing: "certain Marxists." yes, I am one of those certain Marxists. I am sure I deserve to be attacked by Castro. I am happy NOT to be there in Cuba to see how that attack by Castro materializes itself, but I am sure any defence from him would be justified (btw: I am sure I would choose the death penalty rather than listen a 6 hour monologue, so I am a bit contradictory here). btw: I am not the one who has problems with reciprocal criticisms. but let me remind point five of OPE-L commission decision: "5. We re-affirm the list policy against flames and ask that all members communicate with each other on-list in a respectful and comradely way." well, I do not find the use of 'certain' Marxists here as respectful and comradely way. but who cares? I will still listen to comrades. the problem to me is not repression on the list. it is the way criticism against Castro is turned on this list more or less explicitley in trahison in front of the enemy. r -- Riccardo Bellofiore Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche "Hyman P. Minsky" Universitą di Bergamo Via dei Caniana 2 I-24127 Bergamo, Italy e-mail: riccardo.bellofiore@unibg.it direct +39-035-2052545 secretary +39-035 2052501 fax: +39 035 2052549 homepage: http://www.unibg.it/dse/homepage/homebellofiore.htm
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue May 20 2003 - 00:00:01 EDT