I want to thank JB for his excellent post of  Sun, 30 Jul. 2000 .  This was
one of the best posts JB has made in recent weeks, and it makes a number of
significant points which deserve serious attention.  It makes me recall that
I have great respect for JB, especially as regards his political analysis of
the current social crisis in the US and its implications for International
affairs.

JB writes:


>Subject: Re: Pound's psyche and Empire
>
>
>in addition, the class war is now a hidden war, especially in developed and
>developing countries.  the most insidious of warts regularly claim to be on
>the side of the people, especially the poorest, while enjoying their
>despotic
>luxury and doing everything they can to keep it, and to keep the poor
>skewered and destitute.

Very astute and accurate observation, I believe.  This applies particularly
to the Republican and Democratic parties in the US, I think.  And it also
applies to similar pseudo-democratic parties in Latin America, Asia, and in
Eastern Europe.





 >the spoken left has replaced the action left, just
>as revolutionary communists have been replaced by the revolutionary
>bourgeoisie, as evidenced in former communists countries where hordes of
>yuppies are now praised in the Official Press as the emerging class of
>note.


This is right on the mark, I think.


>even on this list there have been paeans sung to democracy while the
>singers
>have taken great care not to point out that such democratic movements are
>merely smoke screens for the imposition of free market values, which are
>anything but free, as even a cursory glance around the globe will reveal. .
>. .


Excellent observation.  But once again, I would ask you to clarify your
view.  Are you saying that the major parties, such as the Democratic,
Republican, and Reform Parties, as well as many smaller parties, like the
Liberatarian Party, and the Taxpayers Party are simply fronts for Big
Capital?  I would agree.  Would you entertain the view that any of the
following parties in the US are more genuinely democratic than the major
parties?  Or do you say that all of these parties are part of the smoke
screen?


       Communist Party U.S.A. (5)
       Confederate Party of America

       Constitution Party (8)
       Constitutionalist Party - new political party dedicated to the
advancement of human liberty and
       adherence to the U.S. Constitution.
       Democratic Party (190)
       Green Party (36)
       Labor Party (2)
       Natural Law Party (5)
       New Party
       New Union Party - socialist organization with theoretical foundations
in the writings of Marx, Engels, and Daniel DeLeon.
       Pansexual Peace Party - Platform and propaganda of this radical
grass-roots party.
       Socialist Labor Party of America (2)
       Socialist Party USA (10)
       Workers Party USA
       Workers World Party - working-class party that fights against
capitalism.
        Various Anarcho-syndicalist groups

You can link up to most of the web sites of these parties by going to:

http://dir.yahoo.com/Government/U_S__Government/Politics/Parties/

My question then, is whether you believe any of these parties represent
positions which are either theoretically or practically valid for the
solution of serious social and economic problems in either the short or long
term?  If not, then what course of action do you recommend?


>attempts to forestall this democratic calamity are greeted with anguished
>cries of despair -- except in countries essentially unable to defend
>themselves, where a different kind of anguish is visited upon these
>non-democratic miscreants, as evidenced in Serbia, Granada, Panama, etc.
>it's possible that in the very near future self determination will be an
>impossibility, and that the grip of the global mastodons will be
>unshakable.

I agree with the above statement completely and without reservation.


>where do you think brother Pound would have in the midst of all this
>economically induced carnage?

This is an essentially different question, over which we so often seem to
clash.  I think Pound made his views clear, in the years 1930-1945.  And
afterwards, he made clear that he favored the only remaining fascist
government, which had modeled itself closely on the principles laid down by
Mussolini.  As far as I know, Franco’s Spain was the only government Pound
approved of, during the period 1945 to 1960, when he continued to be
intellectually active.   I dare say that if he were alive today, and if
Spain had continued to be fascist until now, Pound would very likely have
supported it.  He might be among those who defend Pinochet, as a great
military dictator who did things right.  But this is mere speculation.  What
stance do you think Pound would take today?


>do you think he would have joined the
>democratic revelers in their orgy of homage to the imposition of this
>bloody
>rule which signals the end of even the possibility of personal freedom?

Pound would have never celebrated democracy in any form at any time; neither
would he support pseudo-democracy, or any movements from pseudo-democracy
toward more genuine systems of accountability, a genuine system of economic
and social democracy.  He would be against any attempt to actually give
power to the people.  I cannot be sure, but I think he would favor the
fascists of our age, whoever you think they might be.

>what do the rest of us think?  over the
>long haul, who's been more repressive, more authoritarian, and more
>murderous
>-- the followers of fascism, or the great democratic Satan otherwise known
>as
>Western (nee American) Democracy?

An excellent and very thought provoking question!!!

Let us suppose that Western Democracy has been more murderous (in total
numbers of people killed) than fascism.  If that assumption is correct we
must ask why?  Is it because Fascism is more benign, or is it simply because
fascism was defeated, and was not in power for a sufficient length of time
to kill as many people?  I would dare assert, without much fear or
contradiction, that if the fascists had won the war, and if they had
remained in power from 1945 until the present, in Europe, in East Asia, and
if they had conquered American, England and Russia then MANY MANY MORE
people would have been killed.  All the Jews would be dead, the Russians
would be virtually exterminated, blacks, and other colored peoples would
have undergone wholesale slaughter, if not outright extermination.

Also I think it should go without saying that a fascist government is more
“repressive” and more “authoritarian” than the form of government which
currently exists in the US, Western Europe, and Scandinavia. (or which the
form which existed in the 30’s and 40’s in most of W. Europe, and the US).
But if you really want to debate that, I am open to discussing it.  I would
ask you in what sense France, Holland, Belgium, and the Netherlands were
freer under Hitler’s occupation than they were under their previous
administrations?

>don't be afraid of such a question -- it's
>an act of comparative governance, no one is recruiting fascists here, or
>advocating their return.

I think it is a good question.  But if you think the HIGHLY IMPERFECT
systems of Western democracy are the same or worse than fascist forms of
governance, I would wonder what books you are reading about fascism, written
by people who have lived under such systems.  I would wonder who else
(besides Pound) you are reading about the historical realties of the era.

>what do you think of the fact that while brother
>Pound is being relentlessly pilloried for his sins, greater sins committed
>under the rubric of democracy are being ignored . . .

Putting aside for the moment the issue of Pound’s “sins”, I would ask, do
you think Pound’s intellectual errors are the same as, different from, or
the equivalent of the intellectual errors of those who support the policies
which led to US intervention in Serbia, Grenada, and Iraq?

I would be wiling to entertain the view that they are essentially similar,
not necessarily worse.  This might serve as point of departure for further
discussion, is you would agree.


 >is it possible to rescue Pound from the current onslaught .....?

Anything is possible.


>[log in to unmask] writes:
>
><<   As a final observation on the class question which once manifested
>  itself openly and clearly drew its lines in the sand, nowadays it seems
>to
>  have resolved into the question of advertizing and selling to the
>greatest
>  portion of the population possible while maintaining the proper set of
>  "do's" and "don't's" in order to remain as innocuous as possible.

But do you not believe in the existence of real classes, one  which owns and
controls the financial and natural resources, and land, which is necessary
for economic activity; and another class, which either depends on the first
or is compelled to sell its labor power to that class, because it is
deprived of the right to own and control the fruits of its labor?


Respectful and Friendly Regards,

Wei
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com