-----Original Message-----
From: Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, July 6, 2020 3:38 PM
To: 'Roger Loran Bailey' <rogerbailey81@xxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: [blind-democracy] Re: UNAC: On This Fourth of
July,https://socialistaction.org/2020/07/04/unac-on-this-fourth-of-july/
Roger, You're correct. I don't read socialist analysis and I don't see the
world or history through that lens. I guess you could say that I'm eclectic. I
see things through different frames of reference. I've described myself many
times as rebellious.
I know that you're not going to appreciate this analogy, but perhaps Carl will.
When I was in college, for a period of time, I used to go to activities and
classes at the Hillel Foundation. I guess that I was still identifying as
Jewish, sort of, and I liked the rabbi. He was part of a particular branch of
Judaism a division of the Conservative branch of Judaism called
Reconstructionist, and I thought the ideas were intriguing. So I went to
classes and I read the book by the founder of Reconstructionism. The point of
Reconstructionism was that Jews would always be despised by non Jews and they
would always be in danger. Jewish religious ceremonies and symbols had little
to do with God. God was the goodness and health and each individual. However,
since the rest of the world would see the Jewish people as separate, it was our
responsibility as part of the Jewish people to make Jewish identity a positive
and meaningful experience and to hold our way of life up to the world as an
illustration that no one, not the Nazis or anyone else could destroy us.
That all sounded really intriguing to me, at least in theory. The problem was
that Rabbi Kraft expected us to put the theory into practice. But on the
Wednesday afternoon during the free hour that the college set aside for extra
curricular activities when Hillel was having its Hanukah party, the
Anthropology/Sociology Club was having a talk about India in which I was
interested so I chose to attend the talk. The next time Rabbi Kraft saw me at
Hillel, he took me aside to ask why I hadn't been at the Hanukah party. When I
explained why, he scolded me, reminding me of my duty as a Jew to celebrate the
religious holidays of my people. That was the last time I was ever at Hillel
House.
I had similar difficulties accepting all of the tenets of psychoanalytic theory
when I attended social work school. Some of it battled with my beliefs about
the equality of the sexes. But some of it seems helpful. So I'm not disciplined
enough to study and accept orthodox socialist theory.
Miriam
u-----Original Message-----
From: Roger Loran Bailey <rogerbailey81@xxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, July 6, 2020 3:01 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [blind-democracy] Re: UNAC: On This Fourth of
July,https://socialistaction.org/2020/07/04/unac-on-this-fourth-of-july/
The American revolution was most certainly a bourgeois revolution and it was
conducted for the benefit of the bourgeoisie. At the time the bourgeoisie was a
revolutionary class even if it was in the late stages of ridding the world of
the last vestiges of feudalism. As such the American revolution along with the
other bourgeois revolutions was a progressive step forward for humanity. If you
are surprised that a socialist would defend bourgeois revolutions in their
historical context then, for one thing, you do not have the vaguest idea of
socialist analysis of the broad view of historical materialism and the stages
through which the class struggle has passed over time. For another thing you
apparently have never bothered to read all the libraries full of socialist
historical analysis of the rise of slave society out of barbarism and the
feudal revolutions that led humanity forward from one oppressive class system
to other less oppressive class systems. For another thing, if you are surprised
by this then you have apparently never read Marx himself on the subject of
historical materialism. For another thing, if you are surprised by something
like this you have apparently never payed the slightest bit of attention to
much of anything I have ever posted on this list. If you would bother to learn
something about what socialists actually have to say then you would not be so
surprised when they say them. It amazes me that socialists can be saying things
for centuries and it still surprises someone.
___
Richard Dawkins
“The total amount of suffering per year in the natural world is beyond all
decent contemplation. During the minute that it takes me to compose this
sentence, thousands of animals are being eaten alive, many others are running
for their lives, whimpering with fear, others are slowly being devoured from
within by rasping parasites, thousands of all kinds are dying of starvation,
thirst, and disease. It must be so. If there ever is a time of plenty, this
very fact will automatically lead to an increase in the population until the
natural state of starvation and misery is restored. In a universe of electrons
and selfish genes, blind physical forces and genetic replication, some people
are going to get hurt, other people are going to get lucky, and you won't find
any rhyme or reason in it, nor any justice. The universe that we observe has
precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no
purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but pitiless indifference.”
― Richard Dawkins, River Out of Eden: A Darwinian View of Life
On 7/6/2020 9:22 AM, Miriam Vieni wrote:
Well, I am surprised that a socialist would defend a war that was fought so
that businessmen in the colonies could stop paying taxes to the king of
England. They weren't fighting for freedom. They were fighting so they could
keep all of their profits and continue slavery.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Roger Loran Bailey
(Redacted sender "rogerbailey81" for DMARC)
Sent: Sunday, July 5, 2020 9:52 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; Carl Jarvis <carjar82@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: UNAC: On This Fourth of
July,https://socialistaction.org/2020/07/04/unac-on-this-fourth-of-jul
y/
Okay, Canada is politically not that different from the United States and
they did not have a revolutionary war. I guess I will have to say this again.
It was not the American revolutionaries who woke up one morning and said, we
are going to wage war on the British in order to get our way. Asking if that
revolutionary war was worth it when Canada wound up in virtually the same
situation is just like the question that was asked of Trotsky about the
Russian revolution. Was it worth it considering all the lives lost and all
the destruction? Trotsky said that the question was teleological. The point
is that the war was forced on the revolutionaries. They had to fight back or
end up dangling from ropes. However, whether it was worth having a war or not
independence was won. Canada has a significant amount of de facto
independence too even if it was never officially separated from Britain, but
it might never have achieved that de facto independence if the U.S.
independence had not been achieved first. It still remains, though, that even
though you may have plenty of adventurists and terrorists scattered through
history no actual revolution has ever happened because revolutionaries went
out spoiling for a war. A revolutionary war is always a war of self defense.
___
Richard Dawkins
“The total amount of suffering per year in the natural world is beyond all
decent contemplation. During the minute that it takes me to compose this
sentence, thousands of animals are being eaten alive, many others are running
for their lives, whimpering with fear, others are slowly being devoured from
within by rasping parasites, thousands of all kinds are dying of starvation,
thirst, and disease. It must be so. If there ever is a time of plenty, this
very fact will automatically lead to an increase in the population until the
natural state of starvation and misery is restored. In a universe of
electrons and selfish genes, blind physical forces and genetic replication,
some people are going to get hurt, other people are going to get lucky, and
you won't find any rhyme or reason in it, nor any justice. The universe that
we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at
bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but pitiless
indifference.”
― Richard Dawkins, River Out of Eden: A Darwinian View of Life
On 7/5/2020 1:59 PM, Carl Jarvis wrote:
Well said. Of course all we can do at this late date is speculate.
Still, we have had 244 years in which we might have built a nation
that really served all the people, rather than the mostly white, male
property owners.
We listened to yesterday's Fourth of July speech this morning,
because we got up too early and needed something to warm us up. It's
not normal July weather, very wet and a bit on the chilly side. But
we're doing our part in saving the atmosphere by not burning propane
or wood. Funny thing about Donald Trump's speeches, I used to wish
that we had anyone other than George Bush II to listen to.
Carl Jarvis
On 7/5/20, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Carl,
I don't know how you can stand to listen to him. I can barely
tolerate hearing the short clips of what he says that are played on
podcasts. I could never sit through a whole speech.
Yesterday, I heard someone question whether or not our war of
independence was necessary in order to achieve a workable democratic
society. It was pointed out that Canada has done at least as well as
the US, perhaps even better if you look at their medical system and
their lack of a history of slavery, than the US, without declaring
their independence from Great Britain in a revolutionary war. And
I'm not convinced that our constitution is better than most. In
practice, our political and legal system has turned out to be deeply flawed.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Carl Jarvis
Sent: Sunday, July 5, 2020 12:57 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: UNAC: On This Fourth of
July,https://socialistaction.org/2020/07/04/unac-on-this-fourth-of-j
u
ly/
Richard Dawkins speaks truth...as far as we know it to be at this
present time.
I just finished listening to a speech by Donald Trump that sounded
as if it came straight out of my grade school history book(1940-1949).
Donald Trump regaled us with stories of the four great faces carved
upon Mount Rushmore. Of course it was a Whitewash lesson as told by
a White Supremacist.
There can be no question that the Constitution was heads and
shoulders above any other documents of the day. But it did not mean
that it was cast in concrete, never to be changed. As with any
document, changing times make them obsolete, if not adjusted. And
of course, that is exactly what has happened to our Constitution.
While it might be recognized by its drafters, much of the language
in the amendments would shock some of them, and be strongly opposed by
others.
And what does it do for us to raise up those Founding Fathers as if
they were perfect men? They were men of the times they lived in.
Some believed that rank and file Americans should not be allowed to vote.
Some who stood tall for the Rights of Independence were slave
owners, and did not include their human property in such Rights.
And some were certain that women should not concern themselves with
Men's Business, such as politics.
In 244 years from now, as folks look back on these troubled times,
how will they describe our actions?
Will we be trashed because we did not think in "modern terms"? Let
us respect our Founding Fathers as the men they were, struggling to
carve a nation out of a vast continent, beset on one hand by an
oppressive British King, and on the other hand facing the anger of
the Indigenous Occupants of the land they were attempting to take over.
Can't we simply accept that they did what they did due to the world
as they found it? Does that make America any less desirable as a place to
live?
Does pointing out our current short comings make us any less Americans?
And by the way, just who is Donald Trump speaking for? I was highly
embarrassed by his speech. It was a political rallying call,
declaring many dedicated Americans as a threat to our nation because
we take exception to much of Donald Trump's behavior.
Carl Jarvis
On 7/5/20, Roger Loran Bailey <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
UNAC: On This Fourth of July
https://socialistaction.org/2020/07/04/unac-on-this-fourth-of-july/
h tt
ps://socialistaction.org/2020/07/04/unac-on-this-fourth-of-july/
--
___
Richard Dawkins
“The total amount of suffering per year in the natural world is
beyond all decent contemplation. During the minute that it takes me
to compose this sentence, thousands of animals are being eaten
alive, many others are running for their lives, whimpering with
fear, others are slowly being devoured from within by rasping
parasites, thousands of all kinds are dying of starvation, thirst,
and disease. It must be so. If there ever is a time of plenty, this
very fact will automatically lead to an increase in the population
until the natural state of starvation and misery is restored. In a
universe of electrons and selfish genes, blind physical forces and
genetic replication, some people are going to get hurt, other
people are going to get lucky, and you won't find any rhyme or reason in
it, nor any justice.
The universe that we observe has precisely the properties we should
expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no
good, nothing but pitiless indifference.”
― Richard Dawkins, River Out of Eden: A Darwinian View of Life