Re: (OPE-L) Re: Paresh Chattopadhyay 'Capital, The Progenitor of Socialism'

From: Rakesh Bhandari (rakeshb@STANFORD.EDU)
Date: Fri Jan 02 2004 - 13:22:28 EST

>Your post was non-responsive.  The issue is very simple: do
>you accept that Marxists have a responsibility before condemning
>a popular movement in struggle with imperialism to at least make
>sure that s/he or they have accurate sources and a thorough
>knowledge of the situation?  How can you possibly have met this
>responsibility given what you concede in the sentence below?
>In solidarity, Jerry
>>   this is
>>   definitely at least partially my fault as I have only read a few
>  > pieces on Chavez's govt.

Well, I've read Ellner, Gott, Mommer, the articles from Paul B's
magazine, a recent NLR piece,  NYT articles, and several pieces on
the web. In fact I think I have cited as much, if not more,
information in my short posts as anyone else. I am making a good
faith effort, and actively seeking the responses of Michael L who has
been in and studied  Chavez's regime. Again I do not accept your
characterization of Chavez's regime as a popular movement; nor is it
clear to what extent his regime is in active struggle with
imperialism, given how he is treating foreign investors. And I do not
accept the implicit idea that there is no burden of proof on those
who would attempt to rally support for a regime that can present
itself as anti imperialist. This is not a court of law, Chavez is not
the accused; he is not presumed innocent until proven guilty. If you
want to prove his progressive credentials, then do it.
And you have yet to admit that you were wrong to use your
administrative authority to criticize me for my very restrained reply
to Zarembka who had nothing other to say than insinuate that I am a
fascist-Trotyskist agent.

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Jan 03 2004 - 00:00:01 EST