EPOUND-L Archives

- Ezra Pound discussion list of the University of Maine

EPOUND-L@LISTS.MAINE.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Reply To:
Ezra Pound discussion list of the University of Maine <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sun, 28 May 2000 10:12:39 EDT
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (53 lines)
In a message dated 05/28/2000 6:01:32 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
[log in to unmask] writes:

<<
 I think that the attempt to compare imperialisms is wrought with great
 difficulty, precisely because a Guatemalan Mayan peasant's view of the issue
 would differ sharply from a Polish worker's view.  The former, having
 suffered deaths of 200,000 of his compatriots-- at the hands of US backed
 regimes run by US trained soldiers-- would be among the harshest critics of
 US imperialism.  The latter would tend to view America as the great savior.
  >>

this argument seems hollow to me.  if one is going to speculate on those who
are critical of US imperialism, then it's probably helpful to choose areas
where US imperialism has held sway.  ergo, it's proper, in my view, to point
to countries of Central America, where US Imperialism has been rampant for
more than 150 years, focusing on european countries is less than helpful,
since US imperialism has had, until recently, a limited impact in these areas
-- unless one wants to consider US participation in WWA as an exercise in
imperialism, a leap I'm reluctant to make.

<< I agree regarding the definition of fascism and its relation to the fascist
state; however, communism is more complicated.   There are many types of
Communism.  There is council communism, and democratic communism, and there
are many other varieties in addition to Marxism-Leninism or Stalinism, as
followed in the Soviet Union and the People's Republic of China.  There is
basically only one type of fascism:  dedication to following the will of the
Supreme Leader( the Duce, or the Fuhrer). >>

this definition of fascism is, to say the least, simplistic.  in modern (or
should I say postmodern?) times, the emphasis on the cult of the leader has
been replaced by the cult of the elites, i.e., the dominance of the global
corporation.  this is the significance of the New World Order with its
emphasis on capitalism, and the creation of international bodies such as the
WTO to enforce the privileged place of capital in the implementation and
enforcement of policies that ensure its continued dominance.

one further comment about Pound; he quite accurately saw the harmful effects
of the concentration of wealth by large companies, banks and individuals.
what he got wrong, obviously, was who controlled the money -- he, like many
others, blamed it on the Jews, a claim that is as silly then as it is now.
his embracing of fascism, and in particular the "big boss" concept (as Olson
calls it) was in major part a reaction against the power of the monetary
forces; remember, it was out of the ashes of WW1 that Pound hardened the core
of his economical and political beliefs, a dimension that is frequently
elided in the consideration of his errors, especially by those fathead
minnows who are intent upon painting him with as broad and as dirty a brush
as they can in their desire to present him as a talentless and crazed
individual who constructed his concepts out of the ether while in the throes
of petty jealousies.

joe brennan...

ATOM RSS1 RSS2