Re: [MLL] The Communist society thesis: Goodbye Stalin
Mr. WL, You try to write about ''complex issues'' but that doesn't mean you Marxist Leninist. You give revisionist line always and this kind of things have been exposed so many time by our great teachers and revolutionary forces after them. I'm not going to argue with you over these. You can keep writing this *** as long as u want. I just gave my advice to moderators and I still stick to that. Sandeep Though I would definitely discuss anything which would not be re and yes if you use Marxist tools to explain anythinggive Marxist point of view these kind of things have been replied so many time by revolutionary forces and our great teachers also On 21 January 2011 23:31, waistli...@aol.com wrote: Weigh in with an opinion. I understand we write about complex issues, but surely you have an opinion for your position. WL. In a message dated 1/21/2011 10:43:49 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, _sandeep.samwad@gmail.com_ (mailto:sandeep.sam...@gmail.com) writes: Dear Comrades, Why don't we discard the membership of such revisionists from this list? Moderators should consider this option. Sandeep ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list Marxist-Leninist-List@lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list Marxist-Leninist-List@lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
Re: [MLL] The Communist society thesis: Goodbye Stalin
conception of history, and there is no ifs and buts about it. The productive forces leads the way. BUT, here is a BUT on a parallel matter... the Imperialist order is destructive and moribund. Marx and Engels, and Lenin, and Stalin, and the experience of socialism, and the significance of the dictatorship of the proletariat, demonstrates that it takes a seizure of the State, the center of the superstructure, a revolution in the RELATIONS, in that the fetters of capitalism be abolished and the release of the new productive forces be effective in serving the people. Machines are nevertheless a TOOL in the hands of the proletariat or its State. The new class thesis propagates much of this understanding, above, to its merit but it commits a grave error in that it over emphasizes these productive forces aspect of the contradiction between it and the RELATIONS OF PRODUCTION to the exclusion of the Marxist revolutionary class, and invents a new one which it claims has NO connection whatsoever to capitalism yet does so to the ROBOTIC means of production in so much that the new class does not labor and must be sustain according to the communist principle: to each according to their needs, OMITTING the first part of that phrase: FROM EACH ACCORDING TO THEIR ABILITY.. Nevertheless, the ostracism of the Marxist revolutionary working class is revisionism of a very vile and new type. And world events prove otherwise. The time will come, here in America, USA, when the working class will assume socialism again, like Engels predicted of the bourgeoisified workers of England, and so confounding elements and unbelievers will come again scrambling behind the working class begging forgiveness and nonchalantly and casually redefining their revisionism to meet the new demands of the time and again they will be judged by the revolutionary class Labor will become man's prime want Marx; when the working class is emancipated. Something not understood by the new class advocates. yours, f580 --- On Thu, 1/20/11, Nikogda Nichevo intangib...@aphenomenal.com wrote: From: Nikogda Nichevo intangib...@aphenomenal.com Subject: Re: [MLL] The Communist society thesis: Goodbye Stalin To: For the reaffirmation of Marxism-Leninism marxist-leninist-list@lists.econ.utah.edu Date: Thursday, January 20, 2011, 6:17 PM Greetings on Day 4 of the Tunisian revolt! These youth are like our own youth from the '60s -- they fear nothing and no-one. Outside the country the situation looks very murky and unreadable but the repeated turnout of the people into the streets every time the caretaker transition government tries to pull another piece of wool over the people's eyes is a pretty good indicator that nothing's going to calm down until the people see a government shorn of agents of the Old Guard. And every day the movement returns to the streets the other Arab reactionary governments shiver and shake further in their boots. Many more things are starting to come out, like the fact that Ghaddafi offered the fleeing Ben Ali refuge before the latter decided he preferred the relative safety and protected obscurity of a palace in under the protection of the Saud royal house. The US seems utterly flummoxed at the moment and France, the real neocolonial power there is also at their wits' end. I raise this ... 1. because the Tunisian revolt from below is a development that seems bound to further stir the movements in the Arab world at the expense of the established oligarchies; 2. because it is the deed of the masses themselves from below in which the youth seem to have lost all fear of the repressive powers still in the hands of the state [although temporarily somewhat cowed by the mass scale that they are expected somehow to contain]; and 3. because it seems to illustrate a very essential truth we all need to remember in here that if one is revolutionary but not necessarily or yet Marxist, matters can still progress, whereas if one is [book-]Marxist but not revolutionary or revolutionary-minded, any movement will become quickly co-opted. It took the U.S. authorities some time to exhaust and co-opt the rebellious youth of the 1960s and many of those who were revolutionary and became Marxist at that time remained in motion for decades since, down to this day, whereas those who were Marxist but revolutionary not-so-much drifted off or joined the State one way or another. Matters will be settled in Tunisia when the working masses of town and country can come together and put their stamp on things. Apparently the Tunisian CP's return from exile and removed from the stigma of illegality is widely mooted to be happening soon. The U.S. imperialist state has always been as murderous as they come so literally thousands of activists suffered at their hands, yet even among these comrades, those who took up M-L and were not exterminated in prison riots
Re: [MLL] The Communist society thesis: Goodbye Stalin
WL writes Stalin's old formula of what constitutes economic communism in its first and higher phase cannot be applied to America because it is based on a specific state of development of productive forces in the 1930's - 1950's Soviet Union. Actually, only Marx general outline is applicable today. NN comments: And here I thought we were in a list for the reaffirmation of Marxism-Leninism! WL = Earl Browder, in retirement. Earl Browder also liked to pigeonhole Soviet socialist construction as something without meaning or application in the USA, meanwhile insisting that communism is 20th century Americanism. Obviously 21st century anything anywheres on the one hand, and specific material conditions of the Soviet Union at some other point in time on the other, cannot be compared in the specificity of their details. BUT THE *UNDERLYING PRINCIPLES* FOLLOWED BY THE REVOLUTIONARY SOVIET PROLETARIAT ARE A MANDATORY MINIMUM for all those working classes engaged in socialist construction anywhere since. But first things first: when the U.S. working class has disposed of the power of the US imperialist bourgeoisie - and not before -they will decide how things go from there... ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list Marxist-Leninist-List@lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
Re: [MLL] The Communist society thesis: Goodbye Stalin
Comrade Nikogda, You are most correct, it is only a THOUGHT that we are on a list for the reaffirmation of Marxism-Leninism as it appears we are on a list of 200+ members with only 3 that oppose Melvin's revisionisn whil the other 197+ accept it and allow it to flourish. In this light it is worthless to oppose opportunism because the moderators allow it and castigate those of us who do oppose it therefore it stands to reason that the list no longer reaffirms Marxism-Leninism but rather tolerates revisionism. Fraternally Mark Scott --- On Thu, 1/20/11, Nikigda Nichevo intangib...@aphenomenal.com wrote: From: Nikigda Nichevo intangib...@aphenomenal.com Subject: Re: [MLL] The Communist society thesis: Goodbye Stalin To: For the reaffirmation of Marxism-Leninism marxist-leninist-list@lists.econ.utah.edu Date: Thursday, January 20, 2011, 4:43 PM WL writes Stalin's old formula of what constitutes economic communism in its first and higher phase cannot be applied to America because it is based on a specific state of development of productive forces in the 1930's - 1950's Soviet Union. Actually, only Marx general outline is applicable today. NN comments: And here I thought we were in a list for the reaffirmation of Marxism-Leninism! WL = Earl Browder, in retirement. Earl Browder also liked to pigeonhole Soviet socialist construction as something without meaning or application in the USA, meanwhile insisting that communism is 20th century Americanism. Obviously 21st century anything anywheres on the one hand, and specific material conditions of the Soviet Union at some other point in time on the other, cannot be compared in the specificity of their details. BUT THE *UNDERLYING PRINCIPLES* FOLLOWED BY THE REVOLUTIONARY SOVIET PROLETARIAT ARE A MANDATORY MINIMUM for all those working classes engaged in socialist construction anywhere since. But first things first: when the U.S. working class has disposed of the power of the US imperialist bourgeoisie - and not before -they will decide how things go from there... ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list Marxist-Leninist-List@lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list Marxist-Leninist-List@lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
Re: [MLL] The Communist society thesis: Goodbye Stalin
Dear Comrade Mark, I do not know why you think that the other 197+ people on the list accept revisionism. It may be that we just as well that they think that you are doing a good job at opposing this revisionism. Please note that my comment many weeks ago asking that the three of you not engage in personal invective was not a note from a moderator, bus simply a request by one of the members of the list. It is true that I have generally not had time to engage with the various topics on the list. I am sure that the discussion is worthwhile but many of us are involved in other activities off list, and cannot always take the time to deal with the issues. My personal apologies for not having been able to take the time. Fraternally, George - Original Message - From: Mark Scott To: For the reaffirmation of Marxism-Leninism Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 12:02 PM Subject: Re: [MLL] The Communist society thesis: Goodbye Stalin Comrade Nikogda, You are most correct, it is only a THOUGHT that we are on a list for the reaffirmation of Marxism-Leninism as it appears we are on a list of 200+ members with only 3 that oppose Melvin's revisionisn whil the other 197+ accept it and allow it to flourish. In this light it is worthless to oppose opportunism because the moderators allow it and castigate those of us who do oppose it therefore it stands to reason that the list no longer reaffirms Marxism-Leninism but rather tolerates revisionism. Fraternally Mark Scott --- On Thu, 1/20/11, Nikigda Nichevo intangib...@aphenomenal.com wrote: From: Nikigda Nichevo intangib...@aphenomenal.com Subject: Re: [MLL] The Communist society thesis: Goodbye Stalin To: For the reaffirmation of Marxism-Leninism marxist-leninist-list@lists.econ.utah.edu Date: Thursday, January 20, 2011, 4:43 PM WL writes Stalin's old formula of what constitutes economic communism in its first and higher phase cannot be applied to America because it is based on a specific state of development of productive forces in the 1930's - 1950's Soviet Union. Actually, only Marx general outline is applicable today. NN comments: And here I thought we were in a list for the reaffirmation of Marxism-Leninism! WL = Earl Browder, in retirement. Earl Browder also liked to pigeonhole Soviet socialist construction as something without meaning or application in the USA, meanwhile insisting that communism is 20th century Americanism. Obviously 21st century anything anywheres on the one hand, and specific material conditions of the Soviet Union at some other point in time on the other, cannot be compared in the specificity of their details. BUT THE *UNDERLYING PRINCIPLES* FOLLOWED BY THE REVOLUTIONARY SOVIET PROLETARIAT ARE A MANDATORY MINIMUM for all those working classes engaged in socialist construction anywhere since. But first things first: when the U.S. working class has disposed of the power of the US imperialist bourgeoisie - and not before -they will decide how things go from there... ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list Marxist-Leninist-List@lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list Marxist-Leninist-List@lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list Marxist-Leninist-List@lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
Re: [MLL] The Communist society thesis: Goodbye Stalin
In a message dated 1/20/2011 12:38:43 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, _georgeg@micronetix.net_ (mailto:geor...@micronetix.net) writes: Dear Comrade Mark, I do not know why you think that the other 197+ people on the list accept revisionism. It may be that we just as well that they think that you are doing a good job at opposing this revisionism. Please note that my comment many weeks ago asking that the three of you not engage in personal invective was not a note from a moderator, bus simply a request by one of the members of the list. Comment If one person show in plain language where I have revised Marx on communist society I will leave the list. Not two . . .one person. One. Stalin's he who does not work shall not eat is unacceptable in modern America. Further, under communist society labor contribution is not work or a job. A job and work is just so much bourgeois ideology. I challenge anyone to defend this proposition. I challenge any Marxist to oppose the proposition that under communist society there is NO demand for a prior contribution of labor to be the means to access to socially necessary means of life. Reread Marx . . . for real. Waistline ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list Marxist-Leninist-List@lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
Re: [MLL] The Communist society thesis: Goodbye Stalin
The un-mentionable is a rabid revisionist, not only because he seems to enjoy creating schisms among the class, thus, in the real world, contributing to the old USA sectarianism which he seems so very much a part of, but because he has contempt for the very revolutionary class which Marxism rises to the challenge. To the new class theorist, a worker is revolutionary only in so far as he is replaced by the new means of production i.e robots. In the state that the working class is now, that is, as the anti- thesis of the capitalist class, or otherwise, that aspect in constant contradiction with the bourgeoisie throughout the economic mode of production know as capitalism, it finds itself in a mere symbiotic relationship with the bourgeoisie and remains so until it becomes external to capitalism , like the new class theorist utter, meaning: not employed. This new class must be sustained not according to work, but according to need, thus satisfying a warped interpretation of communist society here amidst capitalism. Even the marginal or part time workers are considered revolutionary only in so far as they approach the external to capitalism stage of decay as gauged by the destitute proletariat. This is not Marxism but revisionism and quite reactionary, from the working class' point of view; and the working class condemns such insolent display of contempt. It is not the first time that this type thesis arises. It is a variation of the old Lumpen as vanguard of the revolution line of the 60's and 70's here in the USA. History and current events witnesses the leading role of the working class as that class capable of sealing the capitalist coffin, although we've witnessed that in the era of Imperialism, the bourgeoisie can reposes power; and hence the need for an effective dictatorship of the proletariat. Applying a bold revolutionary method to Marxism Leninism, based on the revolutionary working class in all its contingents, is the difference between why proletarian revolutions of later days succeeded and the petty pinko attempts of nowadays don't. a thesis, of mine. Other classes beside the proletariat will contribute to the revolution, and it shall be so noted by the fair and just wisdom of the creators of value whom do not exploit. Any class can initiate a revolution or uprising, but only the working class can culminate it. Not because I say so, but because that's what it is, and as Marx understood and predicted. What the revisionists, in this case, choose not to accept, is that the working class and capitalism become that LAST economic relations where one class exploits the other, and hence, for the first time in history, a class to negate all classes comes into being. A Messiah, so to speak.. perhaps Christianity did get a gist of the concept. yours, f580 --- On Thu, 1/20/11, waistli...@aol.com waistli...@aol.com wrote: From: waistli...@aol.com waistli...@aol.com Subject: Re: [MLL] The Communist society thesis: Goodbye Stalin To: marxist-leninist-list@lists.econ.utah.edu Date: Thursday, January 20, 2011, 9:49 AM In a message dated 1/20/2011 12:38:43 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, _georgeg@micronetix.net_ (mailto:geor...@micronetix.net) writes: Dear Comrade Mark, I do not know why you think that the other 197+ people on the list accept revisionism. It may be that we just as well that they think that you are doing a good job at opposing this revisionism. Please note that my comment many weeks ago asking that the three of you not engage in personal invective was not a note from a moderator, bus simply a request by one of the members of the list. Comment If one person show in plain language where I have revised Marx on communist society I will leave the list. Not two . . .one person. One. Stalin's he who does not work shall not eat is unacceptable in modern America. Further, under communist society labor contribution is not work or a job. A job and work is just so much bourgeois ideology. I challenge anyone to defend this proposition. I challenge any Marxist to oppose the proposition that under communist society there is NO demand for a prior contribution of labor to be the means to access to socially necessary means of life. Reread Marx . . . for real. Waistline ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list Marxist-Leninist-List@lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list Marxist-Leninist-List@lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
Re: [MLL] The Communist society thesis: Goodbye Stalin
Your entire political line is a revisionism of Marxism and like a true trotskyist you will only continue in your opportunism and will pay no heed to one person let alone 200+ if they were to challenge your opportunism. You have clearly shown yourself a revisionist and deserve to be treated as such. You are destable scum and refute any and all criticism so it makes no difference how many confront you. You are a true example of modern-day revisionism and it is about time you payed the price for it. Mark Scott --- On Thu, 1/20/11, waistli...@aol.com waistli...@aol.com wrote: From: waistli...@aol.com waistli...@aol.com Subject: Re: [MLL] The Communist society thesis: Goodbye Stalin To: marxist-leninist-list@lists.econ.utah.edu Date: Thursday, January 20, 2011, 5:49 PM In a message dated 1/20/2011 12:38:43 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, _georgeg@micronetix.net_ (mailto:geor...@micronetix.net) writes: Dear Comrade Mark, I do not know why you think that the other 197+ people on the list accept revisionism. It may be that we just as well that they think that you are doing a good job at opposing this revisionism. Please note that my comment many weeks ago asking that the three of you not engage in personal invective was not a note from a moderator, bus simply a request by one of the members of the list. Comment If one person show in plain language where I have revised Marx on communist society I will leave the list. Not two . . .one person. One. Stalin's he who does not work shall not eat is unacceptable in modern America. Further, under communist society labor contribution is not work or a job. A job and work is just so much bourgeois ideology. I challenge anyone to defend this proposition. I challenge any Marxist to oppose the proposition that under communist society there is NO demand for a prior contribution of labor to be the means to access to socially necessary means of life. Reread Marx . . . for real. Waistline ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list Marxist-Leninist-List@lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list Marxist-Leninist-List@lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
Re: [MLL] The Communist society thesis: Goodbye Stalin
Greetings on Day 4 of the Tunisian revolt! These youth are like our own youth from the '60s -- they fear nothing and no-one. Outside the country the situation looks very murky and unreadable but the repeated turnout of the people into the streets every time the caretaker transition government tries to pull another piece of wool over the people's eyes is a pretty good indicator that nothing's going to calm down until the people see a government shorn of agents of the Old Guard. And every day the movement returns to the streets the other Arab reactionary governments shiver and shake further in their boots. Many more things are starting to come out, like the fact that Ghaddafi offered the fleeing Ben Ali refuge before the latter decided he preferred the relative safety and protected obscurity of a palace in under the protection of the Saud royal house. The US seems utterly flummoxed at the moment and France, the real neocolonial power there is also at their wits' end. I raise this ... 1. because the Tunisian revolt from below is a development that seems bound to further stir the movements in the Arab world at the expense of the established oligarchies; 2. because it is the deed of the masses themselves from below in which the youth seem to have lost all fear of the repressive powers still in the hands of the state [although temporarily somewhat cowed by the mass scale that they are expected somehow to contain]; and 3. because it seems to illustrate a very essential truth we all need to remember in here that if one is revolutionary but not necessarily or yet Marxist, matters can still progress, whereas if one is [book-]Marxist but not revolutionary or revolutionary-minded, any movement will become quickly co-opted. It took the U.S. authorities some time to exhaust and co-opt the rebellious youth of the 1960s and many of those who were revolutionary and became Marxist at that time remained in motion for decades since, down to this day, whereas those who were Marxist but revolutionary not-so-much drifted off or joined the State one way or another. Matters will be settled in Tunisia when the working masses of town and country can come together and put their stamp on things. Apparently the Tunisian CP's return from exile and removed from the stigma of illegality is widely mooted to be happening soon. The U.S. imperialist state has always been as murderous as they come so literally thousands of activists suffered at their hands, yet even among these comrades, those who took up M-L and were not exterminated in prison riots or rigged-up assassinations were able by and large to come to terms with the experience of state repression and use it a source of lessons for the future. The working class did not lead the mass movement in the '60s but many of its best activists recognised the temporary vanguard role played for a short while by the youth, students, African-American community etc. in re-stoking the spirit of rebellion that had been repressed among the workers. The workers across the U.S. and Canada have been playing a much bigger role in the antiwar movements of the last decade than at any time in the preceding 40 years. So... the revolutionary instinct and the class instinct eventually find each other and hook up but whether they accomplish much depends on how consciously they make use of their collective experiences of struggle and for this the telescope and microscope of dialectical and historical materialism are indispensable as is the accumulated political wisdom and lessons of the movement organised and led first by V.I Lenin and then by J.V. Stalin. It is quite glorious to be alive and active at a time when this spirit seems to be unfolding in the Arab world, and not necessarily in antagonistic contradiction with Islam but on the basis of working with all those whose thirst for social justice prepares them to stand the gaffe and ready themselves for unprecedented sacrifice for the collective goal of social and national liberation. Cdces here will have note that I allude from time to time to Browderite revisionism. It really did untold damage to the movement of the U.S. workers because it seriously proposed that the workers should give up the independent politics of the revolutionary proletariat and reduce Marxism-Leninism to the work of an educational society. Longer-term veterans of the movement than me can point out that such stuff is meaningless because the movement today doesn't have any hangovers from that negative experience. However, here I would have to disagree and pretty militantly, because the fact is the US communists themselves did not put paid to Browder's legacy themselves, and confined themselves to affirming the Cominform's condemnation, as though that ended matters. Lenin's article about The Heritage We Renounce provides a guideline that I wish the communist worker comrades in the U.S. would reflect on and find
Re: [MLL] The Communist society thesis: Goodbye Stalin
Name calling is not a convincing argument. All that is required is for one single person to show, based on what Marx wrote, my revision of Marx presentation on this question of communist society. Not two people but . . . .1. WL. ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list Marxist-Leninist-List@lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
