>>> "J.WALKER" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 08/17 6:37 PM >>>
John, thanks at least for your regards - that's an
encouraging part of your message. But I read this with
misgivings - am I in for yet another round of tit-for-tat
one-upmanship or are you really interested in the
international communist movement, its history and its
possible future? Anyway I will give brief answers to your
points, but I can't promise that I'm going to sustain this
thread. It depends on your intentions - this is likely to be
my last response to this type of mail.
What do you mean by this? Some international referendum or
the
International Agreement on Real Socialism. Where do you
start?
You start through debate and critique with other people who
are interested in the same thing. You try to forge common
understandings. A lot of this is happening on the net. I
don't regard as real socialism any reformism which is not
aimed at the overthrow of captital. I have written on this
list that this project, in my view and in the view of the
broader left communist movement, must aim at the
supersession of commodity production, wage labour, the
nation state and even money itself. We would need to
theorise in more detail the community of free producers
envisioned by Karl Marx and contained in his critique of
capitalism, what I have also referred to as the material
human community. But furthermore, a critical engagement with
the non-revolutionary and repressive forms of communism is
also necessary. Are you familiar with any of this kind of
thinking or not?
Who
would be included in this large number of people? What would
happen
if they actually agreed on maintaining the staus quo or some
even
more reactionary option?
The minority would have to struggle against them, and if
this is not possible you don't suddenly opt for the opposite
just because the going is now tough. This has been the
desperate option facing leftists all along: either you
struggle or you withdraw until you are able to form a
movement that is strong enough to engage once again. Or do
you compromise? This dilemma has been acute for many
communists when faced with the phenomenon of fascism. The
leninists generally opt for a united front including
everyone from liberals to nationalists. I have reservations
about this strategy. It inevitably (and I use this word
advisedly) leads to what I would call pragmatic and
strategic modes of behaviour or what Camatte calls the
"wanderings of humanity". This ends up in a compromise with
the non-fascist wing of capital, which, leaving capital
intact and even strengthened, in turn lays the basis for the
return of fascism again at a later stage. The opposite is to
withdraw for a time. Bordiga, for example, withdrew from
politics and simply worked as an engineer during the second
world war as a form of protest against the opportunism of
the international communist movement at that time.
It all sound nice and democratic
I'm afraid I have little faith in democracy. As Karl Marx
says: There comes a point where the weapon of criticism
gives way to the criticism by weapons. The kids who smash in
the windows of MacDonalds stores are not being democratic,
but they do constitute part of the swelling anti-capitalist
movement and they communicate an important attitude. Despite
the limitations of this mode of behaviour I prefer it to
that of the parliamentary demagogues and other professional
politicians.
and consentual but it is passive
If it is passive to theorise about a better world then
don't engage in it. I think that a better world lies in a
top to bottom critique of what is. This is the approach of
Marx - the theory of communism lies in the critique of
capitalism. If you don't share this view and don't commit
yourself to any part of it, then there's no point in
discussing this further. I've got lots of better things to
do too, like reading a good book, playing the drums or going
out and getting pissed. If we don't have anything in common
here then let's not waste each other's time. Right?
and
ignores the abilty for people to break such an agreement or
for
others to actively oppose it.
This is utterly, but utterly, impossible to ignore.
Please could you explain your theory a little more as I
cannot see
how on earth it could work in practice.
You see this is where you make the mistake. It's not my
theory. I'm just another guy. It's the theory of a lot of
people, the most famous of whom is Karl Marx. If you or any
of the other interrogative types on the list want to be more
exposed to the theory and the different perspectives within
left communism, here are a couple of websites to try (You
are sincerely interested aren't you? Of course you are!):
http://sinistra.net/
http://home.earthlink.net/~lrgoldner/
www.ibrp.org
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.alltheweb.com
Regards, John
My regards to you too John.
Tahir
_______________________________________________
Crashlist resources:
http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/crashlist
_______________________________________________
Crashlist resources: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/crashlist
