samedi 28 juillet 2018
jeudi 26 juillet 2018
samedi 21 juillet 2018
And the winner is:
Wal-Mart!
Presidential
Election Day in United States
By Daniel Paquet
dpaquet1871@gmail.com
“In a last-ditch effort to rally his supporters and
deter his opponent, Donald Trump repeatedly called Hillary Clinton a liar and denounced
her actions as criminal as he sought to prevent the presidential contest from
slipping out of his grasp.”[1]
However, the US remains the single most powerful
democracy (sic) in the world. A Hillary Clinton victory in November would
mean an entirely different global environment to the one that would emerge if the
US were to end up with a presidency of the type imagined in the 2004 Philip Roth
novel, The Plot Against America, in which
the pilot Charles Lindbergh defeats Roosevelt in the 1940 election.”[2]
How could we assess the current economical situation
in the U.S.A. nowadays?
“The US economy is expected to strengthen in the
second half of 2016 after growing more slowly than potential in the first
half. After five successive quarters of
being a drag on growth, inventory investment is expected to contribute
positively in the second half. In addition, business should regain
momentum. Specifically a rising oil rig
count suggests an improvement in energy investment. Residential investment also contracted in the
second quarter as the composition of housing construction shifted toward
smaller homes. It is expected to resume
growing, in line with demographic demand for housing. Meanwhile, consumption growth has been
strong, underpinned by robust consumer confidence and a strong labour market,
with ongoing robust job gains over the past several years.
Economic growth is expected to pick up to about 2 per
cent on average over 2017 - 2018, as forecast in the July Report. However, the expected composition of growth
has shifted. Business investment is a
projected to expand at a more moderate pace than previously forecast, and the
profile for residential investment is expected to be lower. Offsetting these revisions is a slightly
faster pace of consumption growth.
Business investment is now projected to grow about 3 per cent per year
over 2017-2018, in line with the anticipated recovery in aggregate demand. Growth in exports should also pick up as the
drag associated with the past appreciation of the US dollar continues to
dissipate.
Core PCE (personal consumption expenditure) inflation
has risen from its recent trough of 1.4 per cent in the fourth quarter of 2015
and is projected to reach 2 per cent by 2018, as wage pressures rise and the
disinflationary effects of the past exchange rate appreciation ease.”[3]
The question is:
what would America look like after fascist-like governments having been
in power?
“It may be that national populists and cynical
autocrats, but new forms of resistance to bigotry are also emerging. It may be that national populist have
overreached (Trump’s racist and misogynist antics); or that memories of a dark
past and the need to avert political catastrophe have come to the fore (Germans
wanting to counter the far-right Alternative for Germany, French citizens
worried about Le Pen). (…)
But from Clinton’s lead to the surprising strength of
Europe’s political centre-ground, and with the novelty of Russia being
discredited on many fronts, the picture is not just doom and gloom for the
democratically minded. If this is an
interconnected world, then the pushback against national populism may be
stronger than we think.”[4]
“A vital lesson of the modern era is that
internationalism (e.g. imperialism, -Ed.) has stabilized the world, while
lapses into bellicose nationalism have wreaked havoc. (…)
Through the 1990s, for the most part, economies
continued to grow, median incomes climbed, jobs were plentiful and markets
signaled a bright future. In 2007, the
Dow Jones industrial average soared to a record high. A year later, the euro
reached its maximum value against the dollar.
But within a few months, America’s banking and housing sectors had
crashed, prompting the worst financial crisis since the 1930s. Close to nine million Americans lost their
jobs and a similar number of homeowners were forced to foreclosures, surrenders
of their homes or distress sales. The
decline in national wealth hit the poor and middle class hardest. (…)
The election campaign in the United States has
revealed a similar malaise. Many
Americans, especially in rural and blue-collar areas, are pessimistic about the
future and nostalgic for a seemingly better past. (…)
(On the other hand), the NATO alliance needs beefing
up to help prevent Europe’s political disintegration – and this must be a major
priority for any incoming United States administration.
The next president will have domestic challenges as
well, given the gridlock between the executive and legislative branches, and an
inward turn in the public mood. The current
polarization and dispiriting presidential campaign may also cast a pall over
the future.”[5]
As some Canadian columnists put it, there is a resemblance
between Donald Trump and some candidates to the leadership of the Conservative
Party of Canada; out of them, Kellie Leitch.
“Long on bombast and short on details, Ms.Leitch’s
Canadian value s proposition (to the House of Commons, -Ed.) has a certain
Donald Trump-like whiff to it. And much like
Mr. Trump’s various utterings, it might play well for a segment of her party’s base
but hasn’t yet proven to be successful with the voting public at large. Even so, that she sees dividends in
exploiting Canadian values says more about that old cliché than many would care
of admit If Ms. Leitch’s campaign gains
support, it would as in the case with Mr. Trump’s candidacy, make Canadians
acknowledge the level of their hostility toward the very kind of people who built the country in
the first place.”[6]
Surely, several Sanders’ organizers regret even more
deeply the resignation of their candidate.
They probably think that he would have done it better. Ms. Clinton’s
coziness with Wall Street confirms it unfortunately.
“Some of Mr. Sanders’s admirers have been compelled to
consider again what might have been.
With a couple of beaks and more fortunate timing, many of t hem believe,
the rumpled socialist really, truly could have been president. (He had the support of unions, such as) the
National Nurses United… (They said) ‘It’s going to look like change. But it’s not change’.”[7]
Nevertheless, it seems obvious that many voters will
express themselves by electing the less of the two evils.
One commentator wrote: “I just wish more of that (meaning strongly in favour of
capitalism, -Ed.) Hillary were campaigning right now and building a mandate for
what she really believes. WikiHillary?
I’m with her. Why? Let’s start with what Wikileaks says she said
at Brazil, Banco Itau event in May
2013: ‘I think we have to have a
concerted plan to increase trade… and we have to resist protectionism, other
kinds of barriers to market access and to trade.’ She also said, ‘My dream is a hemispheric
common market, with open trade and open borders, sometime in the future with
energy that is as green and sustainable as we can get it, powering growth and
opportunity for every person in the hemisphere.’ That’s music to my ears. A hemisphere where nations are trading with
one another, and where more people can collaborate and interact for work, study,
tourism and commerce, is a region that is likely to be growing more prosperous
with fewer conflicts, especially if more of that growth is based on clean
energy.”[8]
Nevertheless, “we must also note that Engels is most
definite in calling universal suffrage an instrument of bourgeois rule. Universal suffrage, he says, obviously
summing up the long experience of German Social-Democracy, is ‘the gauge of the
maturity of the working class. It cannot
and never will be anything more in the present-day state”.[9]
“What is now happening to Marx’s teaching has, in the
course of history, happened repeatedly to the teachings of revolutionary
thinkers and leaders of oppressed classes struggling for emancipation. During the life time of great
revolutionaries, the oppressing classes constantly hounded them, received their
teachings with the most savage malice, the most furious hatred and the most
unscrupulous campaigns of lies and slander.
After their death, attempts are made to convert them into harmless icons,
to canonize them, so to say, and to surround their names with a certain halo for the ‘consolation’ of the oppressed
classes ad with the object of duping the latter, while at the same time emasculating
the essence of the revolutionary
teaching, blunting its revolutionary edge and vulgarizing it. At the present time, the bourgeoisie and the
opportunists within the working -class movement concur in this ‘doctoring ‘of
Marxism. They omit, obliterate and distort the revolutionary side of t his
teaching, its revolutionary soul. They
push to the foreground and extol what is or seems acceptable to the bourgeoisie.”[10]
Communist News
www.dpaquet1871.blogspot.com
La Nouvelle Vie Réelle www.lnvr.blogspot.com
marxistas-leninistas Latinas hojas www.ma-llh.blogspot.com
Le sourire de l’Orient
www.lesouriredelorient.blogspot.com
ARCHIVES
La Vie Réelle www.laviereelle.blogspot.com
Pour la KOMINTERN now! www.pourlakominternnow.blogspot.com
[1] Slater,
Joanna, Trump, Clinton trade attacks in final
debate showdown, The Globe and Mail, Toronto, Thursday, October 20, 2016,
front page
[2] Nougayrède,
Natalie, Backlash against bigotry is
under way, The Guardian Weekly 21.10.16, page 19
[5] Solana,
Javier (former foreign minister of Spain, high representative for the European
Union’s common foreign and security policy and secretary general of the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization); Talbott, Strobe (president of the Brookings
Institution and a former United States deputy secretary of state), How to stop the decline of the West, The
New York Times, International Edition, Thursday, October 20, 2016, page 12 and
14
[6] Patriquin, Martin (Québec bureau
chief for Macleans’s), TheTrump side of Canada, The New York Times, International Edition, Thursday, October 20,
2016, page 12 and 14
[7] Flegenheimer,
Matt; Alcindor, Yamiche, Some Sanders
backers still feeling regret, The
New York Times, International Edition, Thursday, October 20, 2016, page 4
[8] Friedman,
Thomas L., Supporting WikiHillary for
president, The New York Times, International Edition, Thursday, October 20,
2016, front page
[9] Lenin,
V.I., The State and Revolution,
Foreign Languages Press, Peking 1970, Reprinted by Red Star Publishers, U.S.A.,
2014, page 10
jeudi 19 juillet 2018
Marxist-Leninist Philosophy and Imperialism
Is US
Imperialism heading towards a new world war?
By Daniel Paquet, dpaquet1871@gmail.com
“Since the masses represent the determining force of
economic and political development, they make a sizable contribution to the
advancement of culture-science and art.
These arose and developed on the basis of people’s labour activities
and, at the initial stages, formed a component part of them. By transforming reality and by creating new
material goods that do not exist in a natural form, the masses developed t heir
consciousness, mental abilities and capacity to create spiritual values, which
are a materialized generalization of people’s transforming activities. Later on, when manual labour separated from
intellectual work, spiritual activity became a monopoly of special social
groups-classes. Even then, the role of
the masses in the development of culture did not diminish, for the latter has
its roots deep among ideas, feelings and strivings cherished by the masses.
Maxim Gorky wrote that the people constitute not only the force that creates
material wealth, but also the only eternal source of spiritual values.”[1]
“For centuries, Russia has been a resource-exporting
country, an economic laggard and a touchy partner, driven by a European culture
and a decidedly un-European body politic. (…)
Its one successful reform since 2000 has been to
revamp and re-equip its armed forces. (…)
But the Russian population seems to accept falling
incomes and general uncertainty as the price of what is leaders portray as
national resurgence. (…)
Arguably, Russia is the only major power that no
longer hesitates to shatter longstanding relationships with others. (…)
Russia no longer sees itself as a power seeking to
escape isolation imposed by the West for occupying Crimea and intervening in
Ukraine. Instead, it pursues the claim
of a victorious power whose transgressions become irrelevant because winners
don’t have to justify themselves. (…)
In short, the Kremlin has made its decisions: Put the onerous domestic problems aside, play
the power game, do not blink, and call everything the West says a bluff. A victory, this thinking goes, will one day
recoup all costs. (…)
Any regime presiding over a backward oil-dependent
economy will not be able to modernize it by waging wars and poisoning every
relationship it still has. It may not
happen soon, but someday in the future, Russia will have to take up the hard
work of fixing both its economic base and its position among its peers.”[2]
It clearly means that if Russian authorities want to
be part of the Imperialist gang, they have to follow the rule, which is first
to follow the leadership of the strongest, which is to abide by US domination.
The policy of socialist Soviet Union was quite
different of capitalist Russia in international matters.
At that time, it was clear to all that: “The natural
tendency of major capitalist countries, the U.S., Britain, and France,
therefore, leads to militarism, new wars, and the enslavement and systematic
robbery of other countries. Ultimately,
only the abolition of imperialism in the U.S., Britain, and France – the
overthrow of capitalism in these countries – will end their tendencies to
aggression. Important work remains to be
done, however, even though favorable conditions for the assumption of power in
any imperialist country may not yet exist:
Communists should focus on encouraging and leading the peace movement
and other democratic forces. The peace
movement, Stalin writes, can play a very positive role in ‘preventing’ or ‘temporarily
postponing’ a particular war, or in temporarily preserving a particular peace.
(…)
The duty of Communists in the U.S., for example,
entails advocacy of the right of nations to independent development free from
U.S. imperialism, to include the explicit right of Cuba and other countries to
become and remain socialist, free from any U.S. invasion, blockade, or other
interference.”[3]
Meanwhile, these days, world peace is compromise as
would say Baron Clausewitz.
“In another apparently orchestrated message to the US,
Chinese and Russian military officials held a joint briefing on their
opposition to Washington’s plans to deploy
an anti-ballistic missile system in South Korea. (…)
Cai Jun, a general in the People’s Liberation Army,
said Russia and China would hold a second set of missile defence joint maneuvers
next year, following a first round in Moscow in May. The drills underline how opposition to US has
driven Russia and China closer together on military matters.” [4]
La Nouvelle Vie Réelle www.lnvr.blogspot.com
Communist News www.dpaquet1871.blogspot.com
marxistas-leninistas latinas hojas www.ma-llh.blogspot.com
Le sourire de l’Orient www.lesouriredelorient.blogspot.com
Archives:
La Vie Réelle, www.laviereelle.blogspot.com
Pour la KOMINTERN now! www.pourlakominternnow.blogspot.com
[2] Trudolyubov,
Maxim, A Russia-U.S. alliance sinks, The
New York Times International Edition, Thursday, October 13, 2016, page 16
[3] Connolly,
James, Stalin on Socialist Construction
and the Transition to Communism :
Against Revisionism & For Building the New Society, Real Existing
Socialism : http//realexistingsocialism.blogspot.com Mt. Vernon,
U.S.A., August 2009, page11
[4] Clover,
Charles, South China Sea expert floats
idea of Beijing air defence zone, Financial Times, Thursday 13 October
2016, page 5
lundi 16 juillet 2018
JULY 1st: CANADA DAY
A Marxist
approach to the 150th anniversary of Canada (July 1st, 1867-2017)
By Daniel Paquet dpaquet1871@gmail.com
What really occurred on July 1st 1867? Well, a meeting of merchants, bankers and
people of liberal professions took place in Fredericton (capital city of the Province
Prince-Edward Island). They decided to
establish a common market, more or less independent from Great Britain, that
continued to include them in the Commonwealth and gave them protection. Nowadays, it is a day of celebrations; but it
has nothing to do for instance with July 14th in France, while in
1789, the French people seized the political power, abolished monarchy and
proclaimed a Republic, with notably the ideas of the Lumières. For instance,
Robespierre, one of the leaders of this Revolution was especially inspired by Le Contrat social, masterpiece of Jean-Jacques
Rousseau. In Canada (which could mean in
one of the several Amerindian languages:
the small village), nothing of the sort happened. It was rather quiet.
In paradox, the working people around the world gave
themselves a day of remembrance for past struggles and a day of festivities to always
keep in mind the historical battles of the proletariat. As says the Russian
leader, Lenin: “the trade unions were a tremendous step forward for the working
class in the early days of capitalist development, inasmuch as they marked a
transition from the workers’ disunity and helplessness to the rudiments of class
organization…” [1]
This special day is called May Day and it takes place on May the First every
year all around the world. In a
nutshell, Canadian Confederation Day of British colonies has no people’s
content, while May Day has a specific international struggle’s
significance. But we can say that
Canadian Communists gave a particular meaning to the peoples of Canada as the
need to break the unequal union between English-speaking Canada and Québec (and
it goes as well with the Native peoples, immigrants, etc. For Québec, the Communists claim the right of
the French-Canadian nation to self-determination up and including the right to
secede if such is the will of the people in Québec.
A new party emerged in 1921, the Communist Party of
Canada and as said one of its past General Secretary, Tim Buck, in 1965: “… We will build the Communist party,
strengthen the Party, and extend our influence in preparation for the change
which I know is going to come.”[2]
Now as for those who believe and especially maneuver for
the workers to stay away from this revolutionary party, let’s remember Lenin’s
word: “Class political consciousness can be brought to the workers only from
without, that is only from outside on the economic struggle, from outside of
the sphere of relations between workers and employers.”[3]
Could we not have a last word on the State which calls
in a viewpoint of its realization in Canada?
“The State is, therefore by no means a power forced on society from
without; just as little is it, the reality, of the ethical idea,’ ‘the image
and reality of reason,’ as Hegel maintains.
Rather, it is a product of
society at a certain stage of development.; it is the admission that this society
has become entangled in an insoluble contradiction with itself, that it is
cleft into irreconcilable antagonisms, cases with conflicting economic
interest, might not consume themselves and society in sterile struggle, a power seemingly
standing above society became necessary for the purpose of moderating the
conflict of keeping it within the bounds of ‘order’; and this power , arisen
out of society, but placing itself above it, and increasingly alienating itself
from it, is the state.” [4] The
Manifesto of the Communist Party, written by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels
develops this thesis fully; as well as the brochure published by Lenin, whose
name is The State and Revolution.
While Canada is ranking second for its size, after
Russia; the population is rather small:
34 millions, with a national minority (the Québécois), of around 8, 6
millions. Both nations would have a lot
to lose politically and economically being independent one from the other.
Communist News
La Nouvelle Vie Réelle
marxistas-leninistas latinas hojas
Le sourire de l’Orient
Archives: Pour la KOMINTERN now!
[1] Lenin, On the Organizational Principles
of a Proletarian Party, Novosti Press Agency Publishing House, Moscow,
1972, page 271).
[2] Reminiscences of Tim Buck, Yours
in the Struggle, NC Press Limited, Toronto, 1977, page 405).
[3] Lenin, V.I., What is to be done,
Foreign Languages Press, Peking, 1973¬Reprinted by Red Star Publishers, U.S.A.,
2014, page 73).
[4] Edited by Robert C. Tucker, The
Marx-Engels Reader, W. W. Norton & Company, New York – London,
1978, page 752).
jeudi 12 juillet 2018
About some Greek thinkers
By Daniel Paquet
ARISTOTLE
“Certain notions of the separate, isolated existence
of phenomena and their interconnection appeared together with the emergence of
philosophy. Thus, the first Greek philosophers
took interconnection as the basic principle for explaining various
phenomena. By taking a substance or natural
phenomenon (air, water, fire) as the original source, Greek philosophers showed
that all phenomena had appeared as a result of certain changes in that
substance (phenomenon) and that, being but different states of one and the same
nature, they were intrinsically interconnected, passing from one into another
and into the original source. (...)
The first Greek philosophers regarded interconnection
as the interpassage of phenomena into each other. Later, however, this view was succeeded by
another one, according to which interconnection was a mechanical joining and
unjoining of the same immutable elements.
This view was held by Empedocles and Anaxagoras, among others. Aristotle
overcame the limitations of this dependence of things. Aristotle
wrote: ‘All relatives have correlatives…’
He was the first to declare ‘relation’ as a category, thus lending it
the necessary generality.
In contrast to Plato,
Aristotle rejected the existence of
an insurmountable wall between possibility and reality, although he
acknowledged the separate, independent existence of these two categories. He believed that the possible can turn into
the real, and vice versa. He considered
primordial matter to be pure possibility, while the form that ultimately merged
with God, who was the form of forms, was in this view pure reality. The blending of form with matter resulted in
the appearance of qualitatively definite things possessing possible and real
existence and changing when one opposite (possibility) changed into another
(reality). According to Aristotle, the transition of
possibility into reality did not occur as a result of forces and tendencies
inherent in a thing – it was connected with the action of external factors, of outside
force, i.e. of a certain really existing thing.
From a thing existing as a possibility, he believed, as a result of the
action of another thing, also existing in reality.”[1]
Aristotle
was born in 384 B.C. in the northern town of Stagira, far from the intellectual centre of Greece. His father, Nicomachus, was a physician
attached to the court of Philip of Macedon, and a plausible speculation
ascribes to paternal influence not only Aristotle’s later connection with the
Macedonian dynasty but also his powerful interest in, and love of, things
scientific.
In 367, Aristotle
moved south to Athens. Whether or not he was originally attracted there by the
pull of Plato, he quickly became
associated with the Academic circle,
that brilliant band of philosophers, scientists, mathematicians and politicians
which gathered in Athens under the inspiring leadership of Plato.
In 323 Alexander died in Babylon. When the news reached Athens Aristotle, unwilling to share the fate
of Socrates, left the city lest the Athenians put a second philosopher to
death. He went to Chalcis, where he died
a few months later. His will, which has
survived, is a happy and humane document.”[2]
Furthermore, Aristotle
says: “Whatever is incapable of participating in the association which we call
the state, a dumb animal for example and equally whatever is perfectly
self-sufficient and has not need to (e.g. a god), is not a part of the state at
all.
Among all men,
then, there is a natural impulse towards this kind of association; and the
first man to construct a state deserves credit for conferring very great
benefits. For as man is the best of all
animals when he has reached his full development, so he is worst of all when
divorced from law and justice. Injustice
armed is hardest to deal with; and though man is born with weapons which he can
use in the service of practical wisdom and virtue, it is all too easy for him
to use them for the opposite purposes. Hence man without virtue is the most
savage, the most unrighteous, and the worst in regard to sexual license and
gluttony. The virtue of justice is a
feature of a state; for justice is the arrangement of the political association
and a sense of justice decides what is just.”[3]
PLATO
“The ancient Greek philosopher Plato… represented objective idealism. In his view, the real world around us
consisted of ideal substances, while sensuous things were but imperfect copies
of the latter that emerged as a result of the blending of an idea with
amorphous matter existing merely as a possibility. (…)
Platonism is based on the division of all that exists
into the real world, consisting of general ideas (‘ideal essences’), and the
unreal world, made up of assorted sensuous things, being just a reflection or a
shadow of the real world (the world of ideas).
To illustrate the correlations between the world of sensuous things (the
unreal world) and the world of ideas (the real world), Plato gives the following example. Imagine a man chained to a pole
in a dark cave, his back always to the entrance from where the sunlight comes,
so that he cannot see what is going on outside the cave.
Plato believes
that the world of ideas is integral thanks to the Idea of the Good, and is
eternal, whereas separate things and phenomenon are transient and
temporary. They emerge from the
amorphous and vague being (matter) as a result of combining with a certain
idea, but as soon as the idea abandons the thing it has created, the latter ceases
to exist. It follows then that real
things and phenomena are created by ideas, which ultimately take their
beginning in God.
Plato’s
theory of ideas was severely criticized by Aristotle,
whose teaching is the pinnacle of ancient Greek philosophy. (…)
Aristotle proved
that no general ideas exist outside and independently of things. Aristotle
vacillated between materialism and idealism.
He held that all things originated from primordial matter characterized
by vagueness and a lack of form, i.e. in fact it was just the possibility of
existence. This possibility turned into
a real sensuous thing only when matter combined with a form (Aristotle’s term), which gave it
definiteness. Although Aristotle, world view was basically
materialist, it also had idealistic overtones.” [4]
Plato was
born in 427 BC, (he died in -347) some four years after the outbreak of the
Peloponnesian War and just over a year after the death of Pericles. His father, Ariston, who died when Plato was
a few years old, was a member of an old and distinguished Athenian family, as
was also his mother Perictone. Ariston
and Perictone had two other sons, both older than Plato, Adeimantus and Glaucon, who are two of the main characters
in the Republic. After Ariston’s death Pericton married again,
as was the normal Greek custom, her second husband being Pyrilampes, a close
friend and supporter of Pericles and himself prominent in public life. Plato
thus came of a distinguished family with many political connections. Through his stepfather he had a link with
Pericles, who gave his name to the great age of Athenian history, and to whom
Athenian democracy, as Plato knew
it, owed many of its characteristic features…
And it is important to remember what a democracy in fifth-
and fourth century Greece was like. The
Greeks lived in city-states, small communities consisting of a ‘city’ nucleus,
with an area of agricultural land attached, from which the urban population
varied in size, but were all small by the standards of a modern city. The population of Athens when Plato was born was perhaps 200-300,000,
including men, women, and slaves; and Athens was by Greek standards large. In a
democracy the vote was confined to the adult male citizen population. At Athens
slaves may have numbered some 60-80,000, and there were perhaps 35 – 40,000
‘metics’, that is residents who because they had been born elsewhere did not
qualify for citizenship.”[5]
Greater Athens’ population is 3,413,990 in 2015 accordingly
to Le
Petit Larousse dictionary at page 1297.
“The question of possibility and reality has been
attracting philosophers’ attention since ancient times. Plato’s
solution, for instance, was to distinguish possible form actual or real
existence. He held that the world of ideas
and ideal essences possessed the property of real being, whereas the world of things
possessed possible being. Since it could
not change into reality and acquire real existence. There was, Plato believed, a necessary division
between real and possible being.”[6]
SOPHOCLES
We then had a ‘dialogue’, with two giants of human thought;
tragedians of this era were also brilliant thinkers. “Sophocles
(born ca. 496 B.C., died after 413) was one of the three major authors of Greek
tragedy. Of his 123 plays, only seven survive
in full. Antigone, written and first
performed in the late 440s B.C., is among his most often revived plays; its
strong roles, and its conflicts between individual morality (championed by a
brave young woman) and the overbearing political needs of the state, have never
lost their compelling interest through the generations.”[7]
Others include:
Ajax, The Women of Trachis, Electra, Philoctetes.”[8]
e-mail: dpaquet1871@gmail.com
Communist News:
www.dpaquet1871.blogspot.com
La Nouvelle Vie Réelle: www.lnvr.blogspot.com
marxistas-leninistas latinas hojas: www.ma-llh.blogspot.com
Le sourire de l’Orient: www.lesouriredelorient.blogspot.com
Archives: La Vie Réelle, www.laviereelle.blogspot.com
Pour la KOMINTERN now! www.pourlakominternnow.blogspot.com
[1] Sheptulin,
A. P., Marxist-Leninist Philosophy,
Progress Publishers, Moscow, 1978, pages 187-188, 239
[3] Aristotle, The Politics, The State as an Association,
Penguin Classics, Toronto, 1981, page I ii
[8] Grene,
David; Lattimore, Richmond, The Complete
Greek Tragedies, A Washington Square Press Book, New York, 1973, 264 pages
Inscription à :
Articles (Atom)