>Oh man! I am much, much more sectarian than that. In an
>earlier post that you missed I described Trotskyism as just
>dissident Stalinism. But to answer the main point: it was
>inserted by me sticking it in.

I mentioned earlier my own conviction that "stalinism" is a bugaboo.  There
was no consistent set of guiding principles that underwrote the decisions
and developments in the Soviet Union while Stalin was at the helm.  There
were identifiable periods, each being enormously complex, based on changes
both externally and internally, and responses to them.  Trotskyism, on the
other hand, became a vocation--anti-Stalinism.  We needn't divert this
entire flow into a discussion of its characteristics, unless someone is
really up for it on this list.  It claimed to be FOR something, but that
something was millenarian nonsense, permanent revolution/world
revolution--concepts that dissolved when exposed to the harsh light of
concrete reality.  That's why its always been so popular in the academy and
never accomplished a thing with regard to siezing power.

>
>Lenin
>refered to state capitalism as a stage in the construction
>of socialism
>under specific historical circumstances  
>
>Yes and you're still trying to recycle that one.

No.  Recycling is something I do with plastic bottles.  They re-occur with
some regularity in the short term.  The conditions that Lenin operated in
shall never re-occur.  I'm simply trying to put the record straight where
you attempted to distort it through oversimplification.

>"Construction of socialism" out of state capitalism is one
>of those highly plausible notions (at first glance) that
>turns out to be utterly wrong.

How so?  Because it didn't attain the "final solution" as you put it in an
earler post.  Socialism differs from capitalism in being consciously
planned.  The development of consciously planned systems is not a one shot
affair.  We learn in the struggle, and we learn through various trials--and
errors.  "Wrong" you say.  What in the world does that mean?  This is again
a manifestation of idealism in the substitution of bipolar judgement for
dialectical analysis.  Are you inferring that there was nothing
accomplished by socialist states, just because they suffered a collapse in
1991?  Are you really willing to ignore what progress was made?  Or how
that whole period has shaped our current conditions?

>
>but the bit about bureaucrats
>becoming a class (an indefensible distortion of the marxian
>concept of
>class) 
>
>How so?

Unity of opposites.  Bourgeois-Proletarian.  Right-Left.  Up-Down.  The
working class existed only in relation to the bourgeoisie, and vice-versa.
That definition of class was predicated on relation to means of production
and appropriation of surplus value.  Bureaucrats neither owned nor
appropriated in a directly exploitative relation to the working class.
They were part of an adminstrative apparatus.  Come on.  I don't even have
a degree.  This is not rocket science.
>
>CSC has become shorthand for a very
>flaky premise upon which an essentially
>counter-revolutionary argument is
>constructed.  
>
>No SC itself is the counter-revolution and it began with
>"Leftwing Communism: an Infantile Disorder" which laid the
>first foundation of an essentially nationalistic Russian
>state capitalism becoming confused with socialism. 

Lenin was never confused, and I don't think old Joe was either.  This is
another gross oversimplification substituting for critical analysis.  Let's
take 72 years of experience in a vast Eurasian Union, with wildly differetn
levels of development and not a single day of peaceful development, and
roll them up into a ball called "nationalistic Russian state capitalism."

The only
>way to ever make good on that is to start over. 

Who in her or his right mind would talk about replicating something that's
past?  On the other hand, who would think there is ever any possibility of
severing our links to the past through some magic, and "starting over."
The first is anti-dialectical.  The latter is ahistorical.

By the way,
>do you know where Lenin learned this "marxism" from?

Marx, Engels.  He quoted them frequently.

Look, I'm not trying to digress into a sectarian quarrel here.  But there
is a pattern emerging here, which directly impacts on the discussion of
what to DO about approaching crises.  Distortions of the past, especially
the anti-communist kind [and more especially the left anti-communist kind],
I have found to be Trojan Horses deployed against revolutionary solutions.
That too is another discussion thread.

I'm not an academic.  I don't care about endless elaborations of theory to
prove who's the smartest.  I am a retired Special Forces Master Sergeant,
who has worked on behalf of US imperialism for almost a quarter of a
century, with eight conflict areas thrown in.  Push comes to shove,
organized force with clear political objectives will decide outcomes.  I've
seen it.  And one of the principles of war is Offensive--which means time
matters.  Sieze and maintain the intiative.  As long as you are reacting in
the absence of any unity of command or any strategy, you are losing.  I
can't make that go away.  Neither can you.  The ruling class understands it
very well.

Stan

>
>Tahir
>
>                                                            
>                                                            
>                                                            
>                                                            
>                                                            
>                                                            
>                                                            
>                                                            
>                                                            
>                                                            
>                                                            
>                                                            
>                                                            
>                                                            
>                                                            
>                                                            
>                                                            
>                                                            
>                                                            
>                                                            
>                                                            
>                                                            
>                               
>
>_______________________________________________
>Crashlist resources: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base
>To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
>http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/crashlist
>



"If insurrection is an art, its main content is to know how to give the
struggle the form appropriate to the political situation."

                        -Vo Nguyen Giap



"Rather than seeking comparabilities in statistical terms among what are
all too often superficial features of different situations, comparabilities
must be sought at the level of determinate mechanisms, at the level of
processes that are generally hidden from easy view."

                        -Eleanor Burke Leacock



"Every day one has to struggle that this love to a living humanity
transform itself into concrete acts, in acts that serve as examples, as
motivation."

                        -Ernesto "Che" Guevara

"Mask no difficulties."

                        -Amilcar Cabral

_______________________________________________
Crashlist resources: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/crashlist

Reply via email to