The SWP's bizarre love for Mr Atzmon
This blog recently seems to have attracted some commenters from the SWP (preeminient amongst whom is Mr JohnG) and others of a similar political ilk. And most welcome they all are too - Jim and I would get very bored, very quickly, if all we ever did was argue with each other. Anyway, this post is directed to readers from that political millieu.
You may already have read Jim's material on the SWP and Gilad Atzmon, some of which was recently reproduced without accrediting this blog in the AWL's latest paper (naughty AWL, I'll remember that). If you haven't, then you should. Jim and I may differ on a number of issues, but on Atzmon we're in lock-step. Jim has also covered the reaction to the SWP's courting of Atzmon from people who until recently were basically just acting as that group's outriders, and this material is also well worth a look.
I'd also particularly like to direct you to a recent post, delivered in the venom-tipped-rapier style of Hak Mao, on the Drink Soaked Trots website. I really do urge you to read it, because it throws into stark relief the defences of Atzmon in the most recent issue of Socialist Worker, as offered in two letters, one written by Lindsey German, and the other by Hannah Dee and Viv Smith:
"Instead of banning him shouldn’t socialists be celebrating his undeniable musical talent, and at the same time challenging those ideas that he holds that we disagree with?"
Hak reminds us exactly what those "ideas we disagree with" are, and it's not exactly the same as socialists platforming George Monbiot, let me tell ya:
"we must begin to take the accusation that the Jewish people are trying to control the world very seriously ... American Jewry makes any debate on whether the 'Protocols of the Elders of Zion' are an authentic document or rather a forgery irrelevant. American Jews do try to control the world, by proxy..."
That's all you're getting here: I'll refer you to Hak's post to read the rest. Now, I meant it when I said in the course of debate with JohnG that I don't think you lot are "bad people" or acting in a deliberately malign way, however much I might disagree with you. So what the bloody hell do you think you're playing at by defending this stinking anti-semite whose connections to far-rightists like Israel Shamir are commonly known?
"Jazz, Racism and Resistance" eh? Well, we know who's providing the Jazz and the Racism, but why aren't you guys providing the Resistance?
You may already have read Jim's material on the SWP and Gilad Atzmon, some of which was recently reproduced without accrediting this blog in the AWL's latest paper (naughty AWL, I'll remember that). If you haven't, then you should. Jim and I may differ on a number of issues, but on Atzmon we're in lock-step. Jim has also covered the reaction to the SWP's courting of Atzmon from people who until recently were basically just acting as that group's outriders, and this material is also well worth a look.
I'd also particularly like to direct you to a recent post, delivered in the venom-tipped-rapier style of Hak Mao, on the Drink Soaked Trots website. I really do urge you to read it, because it throws into stark relief the defences of Atzmon in the most recent issue of Socialist Worker, as offered in two letters, one written by Lindsey German, and the other by Hannah Dee and Viv Smith:
"Instead of banning him shouldn’t socialists be celebrating his undeniable musical talent, and at the same time challenging those ideas that he holds that we disagree with?"
Hak reminds us exactly what those "ideas we disagree with" are, and it's not exactly the same as socialists platforming George Monbiot, let me tell ya:
"we must begin to take the accusation that the Jewish people are trying to control the world very seriously ... American Jewry makes any debate on whether the 'Protocols of the Elders of Zion' are an authentic document or rather a forgery irrelevant. American Jews do try to control the world, by proxy..."
That's all you're getting here: I'll refer you to Hak's post to read the rest. Now, I meant it when I said in the course of debate with JohnG that I don't think you lot are "bad people" or acting in a deliberately malign way, however much I might disagree with you. So what the bloody hell do you think you're playing at by defending this stinking anti-semite whose connections to far-rightists like Israel Shamir are commonly known?
"Jazz, Racism and Resistance" eh? Well, we know who's providing the Jazz and the Racism, but why aren't you guys providing the Resistance?
posted by voltaires_priest at
12:45 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home