The Ballad Of Dusty
bobby
where the spaces are wide open
in the land
of the old
Pine Gap Station
where the scenery's attractive
and the air is radioactive
in the land
where men are men
and sheep are nervous
...
macho macho macho man
I wanna be a macho man
presto macho
presto macho
we would rather have
John Wayne
we would rather have
John Wayne
...
I grow old I grow old
I shall wear my trousers rolled
do I dare to kill a gook?
Vngelis
An arse bandit tries to write a poem...
vngelis
macphineas
http://www.queertheory.com/arts/literature/gay_poets.htm
http://www.everypoet.com/archive/poetry/Oscar_Wilde/oscar_wilde_contents.htm
Kipling was probably gay as well (unsurprising given his close
friendship with Rhodes)
http://www.glbtq.com/literature/kipling_r.html
macphineas
David
>
> Kipling was probably gay as well (unsurprising given his close
> friendship with Rhodes)
>
> http://www.glbtq.com/literature/kipling_r.html
>
> macphineas
Something about British officers "introducing buggering" to the sub-
continent. So...Dusty's favorite poet and worlds leading literary
apologist for colonialism, is gay. How fitting.
DW
jh
Your mind is in the gutter.
-jh-
Vngelis
>
> Your mind is in the gutter.
>
> -jh-
You cant go forwards backwards.
Never could.
vngelis
David
Actually if stand opposite the direction you want to move forward and
then walk backwards you will move forward. Secondly, if you move at
near the speed of light you will always end up in a position
relatively 'forward' from where you start (if you believe in
Eisensteinian physics in this particular regard, which I don't).
David
Actually if stand opposite the direction you want to move forward and
then walk backwards you will move forward. Secondly, if you move at
near the speed of light you will always end up in a position
relatively 'forward' from where you start (if you believe in
Einsteinian physics, which I don't).
srd
Why? Jewish conspiracy?
srd
David
Shhh....and don't forget, the meeting is at 10pm.
dusty
> Something about British officers "introducing buggering" to the sub-
> continent. So...Dusty's favorite poet and worlds leading literary
> apologist for colonialism, is gay. How fitting.
>
> DW
So thick he misses the double "entendre" in his own words.
An old Australian one:
Q: How do you re-bush a poofter?
A: Stick a leg o' mutton up his ...and pull out the bone.
Now that should come in handy for Stevens
and...............and ..............and.................on apst, not
to mention so many past posters. They are fortunately no longer with
us, courtesy of such aversionary classics as the Buttfucker Chronicles
of Sir Stephen Reginald Diamond (aka "Cosmo-fascist", "SRgunD" and
"The Gatekeeper").
Note that I excluded Walters from the list as he just behaves like a
stereotypical member of the clan...every now and then.
PS I prefer the English romantic poets, but there is no gainsaying:
Tennyson at times brilliantly captured the Spirit of the British
Empire and its common people.
But its the apst globalists who carry on the support for some of the
worst traditions of that Empire: of the use of Coolie labour, of
cultural swamping, of the Soros divide et impera, into its
continuation in the Global Imperialist New World Order.
One of the assholes: going under the name of Macphilistein, a blatant
Zionist, even had the hide to seek support for a clear-cut Soros
Project in Bosnia.
David
Well, first, a pefectly good waste of Leg-o-Mutton. Hmmm...but not
that way. The last steak house in San Francisco that served mutton
chops closed 10 years ago. Alas.
Obviously Mac here has an uninvolved position on Zionism. I support
his working it out, even if ends up not agreeing with me, The One True
Tribune of Totally Tremendous Trotskyism (M-L)).
Even SRD has changed his views, and seems quite open about, exploring
new developments and evaluating older positions. I try, that is I
*TRY* to not get on peoples cases while they figure things out. It is
hard enough for me to figure out things as well now and again, so I
don't jump on anyone's position until they figure it out.
This is a free-forum for centrifugal meanderings, not an organizing
committee for solidarity wth the people of Palestine.
I have no idea what mac's view on the Serbian crisis was, rather, the
Yugoslav crisis. There were groups like News & Letters than took
essentially State Dept. socialist views on it. I haven't seen SRD nor
Mac do either, yet.
Dw
macphineas
>
> Well, first, a pefectly good waste of Leg-o-Mutton. Hmmm...but not
> that way. The last steak house in San Francisco that served mutton
> chops closed 10 years ago. Alas.
>
> Obviously Mac here has an uninvolved position on Zionism. I support
> his working it out, even if ends up not agreeing with me, The One True
> Tribune of Totally Tremendous Trotskyism (M-L)).
See, now I know I can't agree with you; The One True Tribune of
Totally Tremendous Trotskyism (B-L) is where it's at. The OTTTTT (M-
L) are revisionist scum. My position on Zionism is actually quite
clear: it is a reactionary ideology, nowadays propagated mainly by US
imperialism. But the Zionist project, despicable as it might be, has
produced an Israeli nation. And that nation does deserve certain
national rights. And those rights are indeed secondary to the
struggle for Palestinian liberation, which can only come about as a
result of the united struggle of the Jewish Israeli and Palestinian
Muslim working class.
Besides, the guy you're talking to wants to string up all the Jews.
My position pretty much *has* to be better than that.
>
> Even SRD has changed his views, and seems quite open about, exploring
> new developments and evaluating older positions. I try, that is I
> *TRY* to not get on peoples cases while they figure things out. It is
> hard enough for me to figure out things as well now and again, so I
> don't jump on anyone's position until they figure it out.
>
> This is a free-forum for centrifugal meanderings, not an organizing
> committee for solidarity wth the people of Palestine.
Our differences are smaller than I first thought; but I'm clearer on
them now. Basically, I think you give too much credit to bourgeois
nationalist formations, and their ability to secure Palestinian
liberation. But as I pointed out in the other thread, this is all
abstract for two Californians; what do you see as the role of the US
left regarding Palestine?
>
> I have no idea what mac's view on the Serbian crisis was, rather, the
> Yugoslav crisis. There were groups like News & Letters than took
> essentially State Dept. socialist views on it. I haven't seen SRD nor
> Mac do either, yet.
>
> Dw
I was against the war when I was 15, and I haven't changed my mind
since. But the basis of my opposition was as an American opposed to
US imperialism, not a nationalist who sees US imperialism as an enemy
of his own imperialism. I also don't subscribe to the idiotic "if
Soros is for something, I'm against it" school of thought. Or should
Jews and Roma be denied the right to hold office in Bosnia because
some of them were hired by George Soros?
macphineas
jh
As for Dusty, seems to me the poet from the Bronx has his number.
You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows.
-jh-
David
We don't' decide the leadership, organization, program of nationalism,
bourgeois or otherwise. it flows, initially, and organically, from the
repression and dispossession of the nation in question.
Bolsheviks support these struggles. They don't really, or haven't,
preconditioned it on anything except that they fight colonialism.
BTW...this was true for Latin America as well which, when the
Comintern came out with their program, was totally "UNcolonized" and
independent for 100 years, longer than most African nations have been
now, but were NEO-colonized. So they were not dealing with direct
occupation, per se, nor, for that matter, were they dealing with that
in China.
Lenin was clear about communists having 'space' to organize IN these
movements while remaining independent of them. He was for fighting for
*leadership* for the movements for national liberation. He was for an
alliance in some cases (the KMT to site the best example, under Sun
Yat-sen) as well. He saw the struggle as legit regardless.
You keep saying there is an "Israeli nation". We disagree. There is a
state, but no nation, again, especially if you ask THEM what the
Israeli nation is, it's me as well as my cousins born there. Secondly,
more importantly, different from the US, is that we've had development
of 10 geneations of "Americans" and the native peoples are no longer
demanding any kind of serious 'national liberation' anymore with most
exceptions. There are 300 million people now.
In Israel there are STILL first generation settlers who continue to
come and...the indigenous people are still ALIVE...that first
generation and DIRECT decendents. This is qualitatively different.
So when we say a CA is an answer and solution within the direction of
socialist revolution to solve the "Jewish Question" it includes ALL
Palestinians. This is why the struggle for a democratic solution
includes ALL Palestinians and the "Right of Return", that is, a
political "Land Reform" where all residents and those in *exile* have
a right to return and participate.
I don't believe that *any* concessions on the "Jewish Nation" or the
"Israeli Nation" will ever sway many Jews from their allegiance to
this Apartheid system. Personally I don't. The 1.1 million Russian
Jews are simply not "Israelis" yet they will fight to preserve their
status. Sabras are not going to distinguish between themselves and
their settler parents. It will be bad. I think most will emigrate so
as not to be 'rule by Arabs'.
David
macphineas
> Let me just address the issue of bourgeois nationalism.
>
> We don't' decide the leadership, organization, program of nationalism,
> bourgeois or otherwise. it flows, initially, and organically, from the
> repression and dispossession of the nation in question.
True; however, the role of revolutionaries is to fight to lead the
oppressed against their oppressors, to win them to the revolutionary
banner, not adapt to the slogans and programs of nationalist
organizations, all which are ultimately bourgeois in nature. And the
role of revolutionaries is to expose that bourgeois nature.
>
> Bolsheviks support these struggles. They don't really, or haven't,
> preconditioned it on anything except that they fight colonialism.
> BTW...this was true for Latin America as well which, when the
> Comintern came out with their program, was totally "UNcolonized" and
> independent for 100 years, longer than most African nations have been
> now, but were NEO-colonized. So they were not dealing with direct
> occupation, per se, nor, for that matter, were they dealing with that
> in China.
>
Let's make this concrete--the way anti-imperialism has manifested
itself in LA is the guerrilla struggle. What is your position on
this?
> Lenin was clear about communists having 'space' to organize IN these
> movements while remaining independent of them. He was for fighting for
> *leadership* for the movements for national liberation. He was for an
> alliance in some cases (the KMT to site the best example, under Sun
> Yat-sen) as well. He saw the struggle as legit regardless.
And his epigones picked that ball up and ran with it, all the way up
to today. But they sure as hell weren't fighting for leadership by
tail-ending the nationalist movements, and we both know how things
worked out with the KMT.
>
> You keep saying there is an "Israeli nation". We disagree. There is a
> state, but no nation, again, especially if you ask THEM what the
> Israeli nation is, it's me as well as my cousins born there. Secondly,
> more importantly, different from the US, is that we've had development
> of 10 geneations of "Americans" and the native peoples are no longer
> demanding any kind of serious 'national liberation' anymore with most
> exceptions. There are 300 million people now.
So at what point does quantitative become qualitative? There is
exactly 100 years separating the US annexation of California and
Israel's foundation, and now 60 years since that. That's at least
three generations, not counting those Zionist settlers who immigrated
from the early 1900's. In 1948, should the SWP have called for
Mexican self-determination in California? Or Indian self-
determination? What about in 1908?
>
> In Israel there are STILL first generation settlers who continue to
> come and...the indigenous people are still ALIVE...that first
> generation and DIRECT decendents. This is qualitatively different.
So when they die, and Israel still exists, your line will change?
>
> So when we say a CA is an answer and solution within the direction of
> socialist revolution to solve the "Jewish Question" it includes ALL
> Palestinians. This is why the struggle for a democratic solution
> includes ALL Palestinians and the "Right of Return", that is, a
> political "Land Reform" where all residents and those in *exile* have
> a right to return and participate.
I don't have take issue with this demand, so long as it is spelled out
that the Jewish working class, nation or not, has a right to stay as
well.
A corollary to this is that the Palestinians have been kept as
refugees by the neighboring Arab states for generations. Palestinian
self-determination and the "right of return" must also include a
"right not to return" ie to become Jordanians, Syrians, Lebanese, and
Egyptians. And this will not happen short of a socialist revolution
that spans the entire region. So ostensibly transtional demands like
a CA must not be allowed to become ends in and of themselves.
>
> I don't believe that *any* concessions on the "Jewish Nation" or the
> "Israeli Nation" will ever sway many Jews from their allegiance to
> this Apartheid system. Personally I don't. The 1.1 million Russian
> Jews are simply not "Israelis" yet they will fight to preserve their
> status. Sabras are not going to distinguish between themselves and
> their settler parents. It will be bad. I think most will emigrate so
> as not to be 'rule by Arabs'.
>
> David
Here we have a fundamental difference; I cannot for the life of me see
how the Arab workers will be broken from Islamism and nationalism
until the Palestinian question is resolved, and I can't see how that
will be resolved short of a regional socialist revolution. That in
turn, will require the support of the Israeli working class, along
with the Palestinian workers. So if my analysis is correct, I can't
afford to be as pessimistic about class consciousness in Israel as you
are.
macphineas
Vngelis
Tou are subscribing to the theory of one step forwards two step
bakcwards...
If we could go forwards by going backwards then that might be the
reason
you support mass immigration. You assume global slave labour is the
way
to paradise...
vngelis
jh
Dave: I wish you wouldn't change the thread topic.
-jh-
David
Done. Restored. Zionism discussion on the other thread.
You realize now that quantitatively, most of Gelis comments now have
nothing to do with *any* thread?
it's like this:
Question: So...is it better to use eggplant or potatoes in moussaka?
Vngelis: You are globalizing slave runner intent of destroying the
Serb nation with mass immigration!
Question: Oh...but...I'm talking about a moussaka recipe. Eggplants or
potatoes?
Venglis: this shows that you in the pay of Soros and the globalizing
mass-migrators!
Etc. Etc.
jh
I think we've also got a "ballad of Vangelis" thread, that'd be a good
post for it.
-jh-
Vngelis
The original post was about an arse bandit attempting to
write ...poetry.
Then I got websites about more arse bandits.
I am on issue you lot diverted.
vngelis
macphineas
So you're not a fan of Kipling? I rather like Langston Hughes,
myself.
macphineas
macphineas
What's your position on lesbian poetry?
http://www.sappho.com/poetry/sappho.html
macphineas
srd
Why? Was vngelis on to something with that criticism?
srd
Einde O'Callaghan
<snip>
>
> You keep saying there is an "Israeli nation". We disagree. There is a
> state, but no nation, again, especially if you ask THEM what the
> Israeli nation is, it's me as well as my cousins born there.
But not your children as I understand your family situation!
Einde
David
I have a slew of cousins there. My to-be-uncle was a member of the
Jewish Legion and joined as a kid in Egypt in 1918. He was an active
Labor Zionist but by the end of WWII had settled in the Philadelphia
Jewish community and met my aunt who is my actual blood relative. He
never actually moved to the Israel state. His daughter, my first
cousin, moved to Israel after marrying a Sabra from Kfar Blum in the
1960s. Tons of kids, tons of cousins.
My son, for ethnic identification, considers himself a "Nicaraguan
Jewish American". Although he hasn't used the term for a while.
Basically he's into Mixed Martial Arts and that is what he identifies
with most! Recently he's radicalized under the impact of the budget
cuts in higher education in the state and has started organizing with
me at the local community collage he attends.
David
Vngelis
A father recently in London took a school to court as he tried to get
his
son into a Jewish school but couldn't as the single bloodline wasn't
considered enough.
The mother a convert was considered jewish enough.
BBC piece at the bottom of it...
http://www.nwn-forum.co.uk/showthread.php?p=22478
vngelis
jh
We have a thread about Dusty, namely this one, a thread about
Vangelis, and a thread about Zionism.
I realise I am a late convert to that sort of Internet etiquette,
which Dave is the great practitioner of and I have never paid much
attention to.
But I think the discussion will be more useful and enlightening if
done in that fashion. Which is of course why Vangelis and Dusty would
prefer that it not be done in that fashion.
-jh-
jh
Done!
David
"Zionism thread continued"
I am into "Netiquette" true, but I long ago gave that up there,
probably when Bush was in his first term. So... "I can if you can".
I'll try to keep the threads alive. One the problems of course is that
SRD discovered how to change Subject titles. This always throws things
off.
So...this is my LAST post under THIS thread. Period.