Covering all bases
Skip Thacker: “ … you (quote) Marx, state that you are a Marxist. Now you deny it and call yourself an internationalist.”
The terms “Marxism” and “internationalism” are synonymous, for the International nature of Marxism is axiomatic. Internationalism serves to inform Dr. Marx’s “Workers of the world unite…” As such, I have denied nothing.
In reaction to my statement “(N)o soldier, sailor, airman, or Marine contributes … towards the freedoms of working-class Americans,” Steve Lockhart wrote, “I would say it’s ‘naive and childish’ to condemn them.”
I did not condemn them. As Lockhart noted, “They aren’t involved in the decisions made by ‘the Brass.’” They are merely used to further corporate interests.
Lockhart: “Obviously, you are entitled to your opinion; just don’t try and sell it as fact.”
I’ve not stated nor suggested otherwise, sir.
Biff Baker: “Most small businesses are run by people who can’t afford to take a few days off … to replace a diesel motor because of a decision made by people in Sacramento who have never run a small business …”
So the right of capitalists and petty capitalists to poison our life support system with carcinogens is sacrosanct, right, Biff?
Patty Akkad: “ … Guy Marsh, I am saddened that (your letters) are always negative…”
What’s “negative” about advocating for an economic system in which workers would enjoy the (full) financial benefit of their labor power? What’s negative about speaking out against racism, sexism, xenophobia, and homophobia? What’s negative about demanding that women be in charge of their reproductive systems? What’s negative about promoting decentralized solar energy and, say, the human dignity of migrants, madam?
In reality, there is nothing negative about my letters. Patty Akkad’s opinion of my letters is rooted in her disagreement with them.