Samuel "Mark Twain" Clemens

[Ilyich]

I am visiting Hannibal, MO right now and I was wonder what everybody thought of Mark Twain. Could he be considered a socialist? He was certainly an anti-imperialist, especially when it came to the Philippines.

“The enemy numbered 600 - including women and children - and we abolished them utterly, leaving not even a baby alive to cry for its dead mother. This is incomparably the greatest victory that was ever achieved by the Christian soldiers of the United States”

The above is from a speech by Twain on the 1906 Moro Crater Massacre said in his famous satire.

[Ilyich]

He also said this:

"Who are the oppressors? The few: the King, the capitalist, and a handful of other overseers and superintendents. Who are the oppressed? The many: the nations of the earth; the valuable personages; the workers; they that make the bread that the soft-handed and idle eat."

[Agnapostate]

During at least one point in time, he was a racist who promoted colonial dispossession of Native Americans, as previously documented in this thread (http://www.revleft.com/vb/noble-red-man-t138197/index.html?t=138197).

[Ilyich]

You did say this in your earlier thread but I think it is worth repeating: that was young Twain. His views on "savage people" changed drastically throughout his lifetime.

[x359594]

The mature Twain was certainly a different man from the young up-and-coming writer who approved the extirpation of Native Americans. In later life, Twain was a member of the Anti-Imperialist League. He approved of the Boxer Rebellion declaring "I am, a Boxer", criticized Kipling's "The White Man's Burden" and wrote several tracts opposing imperialism and the subjugation of indigenous people. One of his best anti-imperialism pieces is the pamphlet King Leopold's Lament about the genocide that was taking place in the Congo. He also co-wrote anti-capitalist novel The Gilded Age.

[RED DAVE]

Good rousing lefty essay on Twain by Helen Scott:

http://www.marxists.de/culture/twain/noteach.htm

(Anyone know who she is?)

RED DAVE

[S.Artesian]

Don't think he could be considered a socialist, but he certainly opposed imperial/racist actions of the US government.

Besides that however, he was truly a great writer.

[Olentzero]

Good rousing lefty essay on Twain by Helen Scott (Anyone know who she is?)Hell yeah I do. Take a look at the source: ISR #10. That ought to clue you in. :D

[Rakhmetov]

During at least one point in time, he was a racist who promoted colonial dispossession of Native Americans, as previously documented in this thread (http://www.revleft.com/vb/noble-red-man-t138197/index.html?t=138197).

I'm sure you were born perfect, free of all prejudice, bigotry and intolerance. You never had to shed ugly attitudes that your parents or society inculcated into your psyche. :rolleyes::thumbdown::(

[Agnapostate]

I'm sure you were born perfect, free of all prejudice, bigotry and intolerance. You never had to shed ugly attitudes that your parents or society inculcated into your psyche.

Why would you insert obvious strawmen into this thread?

[Olentzero]

That isn't a strawman. You cited Twain's early attitudes as evidence that he should be rejected completely when the fact is that he changed his views over time. Rakhmetov's point is quite valid - were you born a rabble-rousing anarchist, or did you come to your views over time? If we had documentary evidence of you espousing reactionary attitudes when you were 9, should we therefore reject you as a tool of imperialism?

[Agnapostate]

That isn't a strawman. You cited Twain's early attitudes as evidence that he should be rejected completely when the fact is that he changed his views over time.

I said, "During at least one point in time, he was a racist who promoted colonial dispossession of Native Americans, as previously documented in this thread (http://www.revleft.com/vb/noble-red-man-t138197/index.html?t=138197)." I never said he should be accepted or rejected completely or incompletely in this or the other thread referenced. Since your initial premise is factually incorrect, the conclusion that follows from it is also.

[Olentzero]

All right, let's try it this way, then.
During at least one point in time, he was a racist who promoted colonial dispossession of Native Americans, as previously documented in this thread (http://www.revleft.com/vb/noble-red-man-t138197/index.html?t=138197).And therefore... what?

[Agnapostate]

All right, let's try it this way, then.

Milwaukee Marxist asked "what everybody thought of Mark Twain."

I think that, "During at least one point in time, he was a racist who promoted colonial dispossession of Native Americans."

If you didn't insert statements that I didn't make and attribute them to me, I don't see that you would have had a problem.

[Rakhmetov]

Milwaukee Marxist asked "what everybody thought of Mark Twain."

I think that, "During at least one point in time, he was a racist who promoted colonial dispossession of Native Americans."

If you didn't insert statements that I didn't make and attribute them to me, I don't see that you would have had a problem.

Twain was born and died at the appearance of Halley's comet---a lifespan of 75 years. Now, in between those two end points Twain was a steamboat pilot, a journalist, wrote many novels, short stories, essays, articles, was an accomplished speaker, humorist, and raconteur, not to mention a family man and an activist. Having thus done so much during his lifetime, when Milwaulkee Marxist asks, "I wonder what everybody thought of Mark Twain" you come up with:

During at least one point in time, he was a racist who promoted colonial dispossession of Native Americans, as previously documented in this thread (http://www.revleft.com/vb/noble-red-man-t138197/index.html?t=138197).

And you get pissed when a couple of people point this glaring fault-finding and nit-picking out to you???

[Agnapostate]

Twain was born and died at the appearance of Halley's comet---a lifespan of 75 years. Now, in between those two end points Twain was a steamboat pilot, a journalist, wrote many novels, short stories, essays, articles, was an accomplished speaker, humorist, and raconteur, not to mention a family man and an activist.

Good for him.


And you get pissed when a couple of people point this glaring fault-finding and nit-picking out to you???

No. I point out my actual statement, and not imaginary words put into my mouth, or into my text, as it were. Olentzero said, "You cited Twain's early attitudes as evidence that he should be rejected completely."

This is false. I did not make such a statement. Denying that I made this statement is a matter of factual reality, not of "get[ting] pissed."

[Reznov]

You did say this in your earlier thread but I think it is worth repeating: that was young Twain. His views on "savage people" changed drastically throughout his lifetime.

That being said, Che Guevara also made many racist comments towards Mexicans and African Americans when he was younger.

You become a revolutionary, not born one. We shouldn't judge them on what they wrote one time when they were young, but their actions and writings overall in their life and realization.

[Olentzero]

I think that, "During at least one point in time, he was a racist who promoted colonial dispossession of Native Americans."What we're trying to get at here is why you felt that particular aspect, out of everything he did in his life, should be pointed out. And that dismissive "Good for him" you threw in there when Rakhmetov pointed out other things he'd done doesn't exactly disabuse me of my earlier notions.

So: why did you say what you said?

[Agnapostate]

What we're trying to get at here is

reading things into my posts absent explicit statements?

I wouldn't recommend it. You'd be on much firmer ground if you simply responded to what I say, and not what you imagine me to be thinking.

[CleverTitle]

I can't figure out why this discussion is still happening.

Person posts thread about Mark Twain, other person posts information on Mark Twain - even qualified with "at one point in time." I don't see the issue.

[khad]

He was the vice president of the anti-imperialist league. Since a large part of this forum can't even be bothered to get out of bed to be anti-imperialists, I'd say that he's done a lot more for the cause than a good number of so-called leftists on this site.

[Blackscare]

What we're trying to get at here is why you felt that particular aspect, out of everything he did in his life, should be pointed out. And that dismissive "Good for him" you threw in there when Rakhmetov pointed out other things he'd done doesn't exactly disabuse me of my earlier notions.

So: why did you say what you said?

Stop being such a dickhead, people are allowed to bring up negative points about people. Why not? I don't believe this thread is titled "lets have a big mark twain circle jerk guys!". The OP asked for opinions and information about Mark Twain. The poster that you're obsessively hounding pointed out an aspect of that person. Get the fuck over it, I don't see why you feel the need to shun and attack him for pointing something out.


Is it verboten to speak negatively of Mark Twain in any respect now? Or is every poster expected to give a complete fucking biography if they post here? If so, you've broken your own rules since you've really derailed the shit out of this thread.

[The Vegan Marxist]

If we're talking of socialist under a Marxist sense, I would say no, he wasn't. At least, I never read him ever saying he wishes for the working class to run the markets instead of the capitalists. But was he an anti-capitalist and anti-imperialist? Most definitely! He was definitely a revolutionary of his time.

And like many pointed out, in his early years he wasn't so much a revolutionary. In fact, one could say he was quite reactionary. But, like another person said in this thread, you become a revolutionary, you're not born one. And so, Twain definitely learned from his past mistakes (I would honor him for going through so-much self-criticism) and became the revolutionary we all can look up to!

[Olentzero]

people are allowed to bring up negative points about people.And people are allowed to ask why.

[Agnapostate]

And people are allowed to ask why.

You didn't ask why, initially. You told us why, apparently assuming that you were more qualified to speak from my perspective than I was.

[Olentzero]

And I backed off that. And asked both why, and what conclusions we were meant to draw from your statement. Are you going to answer?

[Agnapostate]

And I backed off that. And asked both why, and what conclusions we were meant to draw from your statement.

You should draw the conclusion that information about Mark Twain was requested, and subsequently provided.

[Olentzero]

Willing to spout off, but unwilling to back it up with reasons and/or arguments. Gotcha. Thanks for your time.

[Cleansing Conspiratorial Revolutionary Flame]

Twain had sympathized with the Revolutionaries in the 1905 Revolution and had supported the overthrow of the Tsar as opposed to simple Reformist Policies. Twain had as well sympathized with the Sans-culottes's and had as well identified as a 'Marat'.
'I wanted the American eagle to go screaming into the Pacific ...Why not spread its wings over the Philippines, I asked myself? ... I said to myself, Here are a people who have suffered for three centuries. We can make them as free as ourselves, give them a government and country of their own, put a miniature of the American Constitution afloat in the Pacific, start a brand new republic to take its place among the free nations of the world. It seemed to me a great task to which we had addressed ourselves. But I have thought some more, since then, and I have read carefully the treaty of Paris [which ended the Spanish-American War], and I have seen that we do not intend to free, but to subjugate the people of the Philippines. We have gone there to conquer, not to redeem. It should, it seems to me, be our pleasure and duty to make those people free, and let them deal with their own domestic questions in their own way. And so I am an anti-imperialist. I am opposed to having the eagle put its talons on any other land.'

[Savage]

If we're talking of socialist under a Marxist sense, I would say no, he wasn't. At least, I never read him ever saying he wishes for the working class to run the markets instead of the capitalists.

You're joking right

[ZeroNowhere]

You're joking rightWell, TVM is either always joking or never joking.

[Agnapostate]

Willing to spout off, but unwilling to back it up with reasons and/or arguments. Gotcha. Thanks for your time.

The reason that I provided the information regarding Mark Twain was that the originator of the thread requested it.

The argument for the provision of information is that it's good to provide information to people when they request it. It's not good, however, to mischaracterize statements made by others, as well as attribute to them statements that they did not make.

You're welcome for my time.

[Boris Krinkle]

Mark Twain was a progressive socialsit, but not a Marxist I don't think.

[hardlinecommunist]

If we're talking of socialist under a Marxist sense, I would say no, he wasn't. At least, I never read him ever saying he wishes for the working class to run the markets instead of the capitalists. But was he an anti-capitalist and anti-imperialist? Most definitely! He was definitely a revolutionary of his time.

And like many pointed out, in his early years he wasn't so much a revolutionary. In fact, one could say he was quite reactionary. But, like another person said in this thread, you become a revolutionary, you're not born one. And so, Twain definitely learned from his past mistakes (I would honor him for going through so-much self-criticism) and became the revolutionary we all can look up to!
Vegan Marxist you are right in the beginning Mark Twain was a reactionary as he did things like fight for the Confederacy for a brief period during The American Civil War but you are right he went through a lot of self criticism and is someone that we canl uphold at the end of the day