********************  POSTING RULES & NOTES  ********************
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.

OK, So out of 11,287,933 vanguard parties from 1917 to 2017, four --or was it five?-- actually led revolutions that expropriated the capitalists.

Unfortunately they turned into such complete catastrophes that working people acceded to return to capitalism.

I wish fucking soi-dissant Marxists would take off a year or ten from braying about "the party" and actually read and study what Marx, Engels and Lenin (but not Trotsky, sorry, Trotsky was a Zinovievist just like Stalin circa 1925) actually said and thought about "the party."

Starting with this: When Marx and Engels originally wrote about the workers forming their own party, political parties as we know them had barely begun to emerge and they were NOTHING like what we mean by "party" (even a bourgeois "party"). Go read about the Chartists which Marx and Engels hailed as the first workers party and explain to me the difference between them and the Occupy Movement.

Marx and Engels were talking about the development of the worker's movement: a whole bunch of people who shared a similar disfavored position in civil society recognizing that reality and therefore saying, well let's change our status in society.

It was a self-and-other recognized SIDE to a dispute or conflict, which emerged organically in the course of the struggle, not something that could be --absolutely the worst abomination of all-- "built."

Talking about "the party question" as the Leninist left does is IDIOCY. There is no such question. It is CULTISM. The cult of the organization: "building" the party magically becomes an all-saving formula good everywhere for all eternity.

This overarching fetish of "the party" abstracted from all time, place and circumstance, is a religious hallucination, a distilled, ethereal essence that encompasses everything from guerrilla bands to invading armies to national movements and we dump them all into "the party" category on account of in all these countries there are political struggles and that means political sides and political outcomes and if we want our side to win it needs a political expression, "the party."

If you REALLY want to understand the ESSENCE of "the party question" as its been practiced in my experience, go look at Leah Remini's series on Scientology and the Aftermath.

Because this sort of "Leninism" is RELIGION not Marxism

On 5/16/2017 2:27 PM, Ken Hiebert via Marxism wrote:
No party is perfect. Nonetheless, in the 20th century parties played a central 
role in every single liberation struggle and in the revolutions that broke most 
with capitalism. To be sure, these revolutions became ossified; they gave rise 
to bureaucratic regimes and then yielded way for the revival of capitalism. 
This had multiple causes that I can’t go into here.

Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 

Reply via email to