Heh. I've had more than a few friendly disagreements with Tony over the
time I've known him. (Like over the IAC/WWP line on Milosevic, N. Korea,
etc.) But "genocide denier" is kinda over the top. For real genocide deniers
see the URL I embedded in this e-mail to the H-RadHist listserv of the
Radical History Review. The anti-rev. website.
Michael Pugliese
P.S. I'll reply to the post of Dan Koenig later when I get a chance.
............................................................................
............................................................................
.
I haven't been able to find a copy of this book yet but, trust that it
will be helpful. By an Italian Trotskyist, Enzo Traverso. "Understanding the
Nazi Genocide: Marxism after Auschwitz, " by
Enzo Traverso Peter Drucker (Translator), Pluto Press, I think or
Humanities Press.
Became aware of his writings from this website which is focused on
combating the "Holocaust Revisionists" of the Far Right.
http://www.anti-rev.org/textes/ (And alas some ultra-leftists like the
brother of Daniel-Cohn Bendit for example. See the book by Pierre
Vidal-Naquet, "Assasins of Memory, " and the more recent one by Alain
Finkelkraut, "The Future of a Negation: Reflections on the Question of
Genocide, "
Lincoln, NE University Of Nebraska Press 1998, for more on this twisted bit
of intellectual history.)
Michael Pugliese
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Van Gosse/Eliza Reilly <[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
>Date: Saturday, January 13, 2001 6:37 PM
>Subject: anti-Semitism & the left, and leftist historians on anti-Semitism
>
>
>>From: [log in to unmask] (Sharon Vance)
>>Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2001 12:00:28 -0500 (EST)
>>
>>I want to ask the radical history list, as well as the history lists
>>devoted to the history of anti-Semitism, for bibliography on two related
>>topics: the history of anti-Semitism within European socialist movements,
>>and leftist historians=B9 accounts of the history and causes of
>>anti-Semitism. =20
>>
>>I have read leftist accounts of the causes of WWII, and I am reading Zinn
>>now. That WWI was an imperialist war seems to be accepted among most
>>historians, or at least among most accounts I have read, and Zinn states
>>this too. WWII in many ways was a direct result of WWI so analyzing the
>>causes of the later war is important. If WWI was imperialist and WWII was
>>a result of WWI than one can say the fight against imperialism (and
>>nationalism) was and still is crucial. And further, Zinn states (p.350)
>>that WWI was needed to avert class war (at least in the US), and probably
>>in Europe too. All of this is to say that class is primary, even in the
>>history of the two wars.
>>
>>But there is also another history, and another question, Why the Jews?
>>Zinn is right that "millions of others were also killed." But these others
>>were not singled out in Hitler=B9s and Nazi writings and propaganda the
way
>>the Jews were. The Holocaust can not simply be explained by this analysis.
>>There is another history that needs to be included, that the left also
>>needs to read, and that is the history of anti-Semitism. Unfortunately
>>most of the books that I=B9ve read on this topic are not very good from a
>>leftist POV, they do not deal with class, and they do not explain the
>>larger social and economic context. They also do not do comparative
>>studies. Often they just assume that Jews are the most persecuted people
>>on earth and that non-Jews are anti-Semites by nature.=20
>>
>>I am familiar with some of the early 20 Century Marxist attempts to
>>discuss anti-Semitism and reduce it completely to class and economics.
>>There were some Socialist Zionist writings on this. I don=B9t remember the
>>names off the top of my head, so if someone could send me those citations
>>again too, that would be helpful. I would also like to know if there has
>>been any more recent work on this topic that makes use of more
>>sophisticated models of relation between class and race and class and
>>ethnicity.=20
>>
>>If the moderators could post this query to other relevant lists I would
>>appreciate it.
>>Sharon
>>
>>
>>
>>**H-RADHIST is sponsored by the RADICAL HISTORY REVIEW** visit our Web
site
>>at http://chnm.gmu.edu/rhr
>
-----Original Message-----
From: Van Gosse/Eliza Reilly <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Saturday, January 13, 2001 6:37 PM
Subject: anti-Semitism & the left, and leftist historians on anti-Semitism
>From: [log in to unmask] (Sharon Vance)
>Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2001 12:00:28 -0500 (EST)
>
>I want to ask the radical history list, as well as the history lists
>devoted to the history of anti-Semitism, for bibliography on two related
>topics: the history of anti-Semitism within European socialist movements,
>and leftist historians=B9 accounts of the history and causes of
>anti-Semitism. =20
>
>I have read leftist accounts of the causes of WWII, and I am reading Zinn
>now. That WWI was an imperialist war seems to be accepted among most
>historians, or at least among most accounts I have read, and Zinn states
>this too. WWII in many ways was a direct result of WWI so analyzing the
>causes of the later war is important. If WWI was imperialist and WWII was
>a result of WWI than one can say the fight against imperialism (and
>nationalism) was and still is crucial. And further, Zinn states (p.350)
>that WWI was needed to avert class war (at least in the US), and probably
>in Europe too. All of this is to say that class is primary, even in the
>history of the two wars.
>
>But there is also another history, and another question, Why the Jews?
>Zinn is right that "millions of others were also killed." But these others
>were not singled out in Hitler=B9s and Nazi writings and propaganda the way
>the Jews were. The Holocaust can not simply be explained by this analysis.
>There is another history that needs to be included, that the left also
>needs to read, and that is the history of anti-Semitism. Unfortunately
>most of the books that I=B9ve read on this topic are not very good from a
>leftist POV, they do not deal with class, and they do not explain the
>larger social and economic context. They also do not do comparative
>studies. Often they just assume that Jews are the most persecuted people
>on earth and that non-Jews are anti-Semites by nature.=20
>
>I am familiar with some of the early 20 Century Marxist attempts to
>discuss anti-Semitism and reduce it completely to class and economics.
>There were some Socialist Zionist writings on this. I don=B9t remember the
>names off the top of my head, so if someone could send me those citations
>again too, that would be helpful. I would also like to know if there has
>been any more recent work on this topic that makes use of more
>sophisticated models of relation between class and race and class and
>ethnicity.=20
>
>If the moderators could post this query to other relevant lists I would
>appreciate it.
>Sharon
>
>
>
>**H-RADHIST is sponsored by the RADICAL HISTORY REVIEW** visit our Web site
>at http://chnm.gmu.edu/rhr
-----Original Message-----
From: Wat Tyler <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Monday, January 15, 2001 8:23 AM
Subject: Re: [CHOMSKY] What limits should be placed on free speech?
>Tony Abdo wrote:
>>Never heard of The Professor, Michael. But he is certainly right on.
>>The overwhelming 'free speech' in capitalist culture, is in fact, paid
>>speech.
>
>Stanley Fish argues that all speech has consequences. Now I
>might think that Tony's past performance as a genocide denier
>should warn me to not read his posts. However, after
>reinstalling a mail client without explicitly filtering certain
>individuals to trash, I'm granting him an opportunity to again
>assail my attention.
>
>Tony, the question posed by F. Leon Wilson was "Is there ever a
>time when the rights of a human being should be limited in the
>areas of the expressing of ones personal feeling and ideas?
>What limits should be placed on free speech?"
>
>If at some point Tony would like to actually address the
>question I'd consider reading his response.
>
>
>>So here's my answer to the original question..... What limits should be
>>placed on free speech?..... Support all individuals' free speech and
>>squash it unmercifully when it pertains to corporate entities. I
>>don't want free speech for Coke and Pepsi.
>
>[etc.] . . .
>
>Interesting!
|
