====================================================================== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. ======================================================================
On Sun, 12 Sep 2010 02:07:48 EDT [email protected] writes: > > >> A question that has never been answered to my satisfaction is why > the > growth of what is collectively referred to as the New Communist > Movement > (NCM) during the 1970's surpassed that of all the Trotskyist groups > combined. I > don't find the stock answers, "the Trotskyist are all oppossed to > anti > colonial movements," or "people joined the New Communist Movement > groups > because they were Stalinists, "all that useful.<< I think that Waistline's response goes a long way towards setting up a framework in which Ken's question can be answered but while his response helps us to understand why the "new communist movements" rather than the CPUSA was able to grow during the 1960s and 1970s, it still doesn't quite explain why the Trots were not able to take advantage of the situation and fill the void left by the CPUSA. I also think that there is a need to look at this in international terms as well. If we look at what was going on in other advanced capitalist nations during the same time period, we see that in France and much of continental Europe Maoism thrived while in the UK it was indeed the Trots who were able to prosper. Why the difference between the UK and continental Europe? Jim Farmelant http://independent.academia.edu/JimFarmelant > > Comment > > ____________________________________________________________ EXPOSED: Make $99/hr Online BREAKING NEWS: People are beating the recession by working at home. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/4c8cbc7fefede1a913em03vuc ________________________________________________ Send list submissions to: [email protected] Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
