Re: [OPE] Latin America

Well 'a' is not 'any'.

Returning to the idea of unconditional support... you didn't yet answer my
question. It appears to me that your notion of 'unconditional' seems to
require a perfect. ideal, state before it is offered. This is quite
contrary to the notion that Dogan and I have, and which he expressed very
well.

Can I deduce that you would never offer 'unconditional' support to any
socialist state held in a condition of semi strangulation by US imperialism,
since this would apparently compromise your 'critical' capacity?

PB.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Zarembka" <zarembka@buffalo.edu>
To: "Outline on Political Economy mailing list" <ope@lists.csuchico.edu>
Sent: Monday, December 15, 2008 11:11 PM
Subject: Re: [OPE] Latin America

> --On 12/15/2008 10:13 PM +0000 paul bullock wrote:
>
>> "I am very happy to support the present Cuban Government
>> UNCONDITIONALLY." is certainly NOT the same as supporting 'any foreign
>> state' unconditionally... which is what you asserted I said !!!!
>
> You distort my meaning. Against your
>
> I didn't state at all that I gave 'unconditional support' for - as you
> say 'any foreign state',
>
> I cited the Cuban government as a foreign state to either you or me.
> Thus, there is at least one government in this world of ours which you
> support "unconditionally" even though it is outside your direct and daily
> knowledge. (I certainly didn't accuse you of unconditionally supporting
> 'any and all' foreign states.)
>
> ----
>
> Anyway, such a word debate becomes futile and we are back to your
> politics, which admonishes that "the task of communists/ socialists/
> democrats" is other than giving "airy opinion" (Dec. 11) about movements
> against imperialism, even as you yourself are airy (yes, I'll say so)
> about the Cuban Government.
>
> I speculate that, for you, Rosa Luxemburg's criticisms of Soviet practices
> were "airy opinion". I myself stand with Luxemburg on a practice of it
> being revolutionary to be prepared to criticize movements against
> imperialism. Did not Marx refer to the ruthless criticism of everything
> existing?
>
> For me, Luxemburg is right because comradely debate is progressive for the
> development of mass consciousness and practice. No debate, no gain.
>
> Paul Z.
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (Vol.23) THE HIDDEN HISTORY OF 9-11 Seven Stories Press soft, 2nd ed.
> 2008
> (Vol.24) TRANSITIONS IN LATIN AMERICA ~~~Research in Political
> Economy~~~
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/PZarembka
>
> _______________________________________________
> ope mailing list
> ope@lists.csuchico.edu
> https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/ope
>

_______________________________________________
ope mailing list
ope@lists.csuchico.edu
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/ope
Received on Tue Dec 16 04:59:53 2008