Can't access the full article, but hopefully it 
is not as vacuous as this extract.

At 12:34 PM 3/10/2008, Charles Brown wrote:
>What is the communist hypothesis? In its generic sense, given in its canonic
>* Manifesto*, 'communist' means, first, that the logic of class-the
>fundamental subordination of labour to a dominant class, the arrangement
>that has persisted since Antiquity-is not inevitable; it can be overcome.
>The communist hypothesis is that a different collective organization is
>practicable, one that will eliminate the inequality of wealth and even the
>division of labour. The private appropriation of massive fortunes and their
>transmission by inheritance will disappear. The existence of a coercive
>state, separate from civil society, will no longer appear a necessity: a
>long process of reorganization based on a free association of producers will
>see it withering away.
>'Communism' as such denotes only this very general set of intellectual
>representations. It is what Kant called an Idea, with a regulatory function,
>rather than a programme. It is foolish to call such communist principles
>utopian; in the sense that I have defined them here they are intellectual
>patterns, always actualized in a different fashion. As a pure Idea of
>equality, the communist hypothesis has no doubt existed since the beginnings
>of the state. As soon as mass action opposes state coercion in the name of
>egalitarian justice, rudiments or fragments of the hypothesis start to
>appear. Popular revolts-the slaves led by Spartacus, the peasants led by
>Müntzer-might be identified as practical examples of this 'communist
>invariant'. With the French Revolution, the communist hypothesis then
>inaugurates the epoch of political modernity.
>What remains is to determine the point at which we now find ourselves in the
>history of the communist hypothesis. A fresco of the modern period would
>show two great sequences in its development, with a forty-year gap between
>them. The first is that of the setting in place of the communist hypothesis;
>the second, of preliminary attempts at its realization. The first sequence
>runs from the French Revolution to the Paris Commune; let us say, 1792 to
>1871. It links the popular mass movement to the seizure of power, through
>the insurrectional overthrow of the existing order; this revolution will
>abolish the old forms of society and install 'the community of equals'. In
>the course of the century, the formless popular movement made up of
>townsfolk, artisans and students came increasingly under the leadership of
>the working class. The sequence culminated in the striking novelty-and
>radical defeat-of the Paris Commune. For the Commune demonstrated both the
>extraordinary energy of this combination of popular movement, working-class
>leadership and armed insurrection, and its limits: the *communards* could
>neither establish the revolution on a national footing nor defend it against
>the foreign-backed forces of the counter-revolution.
>The second sequence of the communist hypothesis runs from 1917 to 1976: from
>the Bolshevik Revolution to the end of the Cultural Revolution and the
>militant upsurge throughout the world during the years 1966-75. It was
>dominated by the question: how to [EMAIL PROTECTED] the Paris
>Commune-against the armed reaction of the possessing classes; how to
>organize the new power so as to protect it against the onslaught of its
>enemies] was no longer a question of formulating and testing the
>communist hypothesis, but of realizing it: what the 19th century had dreamt,
>the 20th would accomplish. The obsession with victory, centred around
>questions of organization, found its principal expression in the 'iron
>discipline' of the communist party-the characteristic construction of the
>second sequence of the hypothesis. The party effectively solved the question
>inherited from the first sequence: the revolution prevailed, either through
>insurrection or prolonged popular war, in Russia, China, Czechoslovakia,
>Korea, Vietnam, Cuba, and succeeded in establishing a new order.
>But the second sequence in turn created a further problem, which it could
>not solve using [...]

Marxism-Thaxis mailing list
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:

Reply via email to