Yes, but is it not the case that in the past communists have helped to
successfully form an alliance between the working class and other classes
including what could be termed the petit-bourgouise?
This was the case in China where the "national bourgouise" were seen as a
potential ally against the "comprador" elements who had allied themselves
with imperialism -- there are plenty of other examples.
In a period where capitalism is taking on increasingly monopolistic forms
and there is a concentration of capital in an increasingly small number of
giant companies, is there not a case for trying to win over some small
business people, shop keepers, locally based small companies etc to the view
that a socialised and planned economy is in their interests?
That does not mean reducing the import of the working class, but could be
seen as part of a strategy of winning allies for the class and the party
couldn't it?
Harry
>From: KloMcKinsey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: MLLlist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: [MLL]On Webb's Strategy and Tactics
>Date: Sat, 24 Mar 2001 16:27:37 +0800
>
>STRATEGY OF THE CPUSA
>
> While perusing the website of the CPUSA I decided to read an article by
>Sam Webb, National Chair of the CPUSA, entitled Discussion on Strategy
>and Tactics. Although much of the document is commendable I must
>respectfully
>disagree with an important assertion that is repeated several times.
>Nearly halfway through the writing he makes the following statements,
> "Let me try to illustrate this point with a single example: our
>strategic approach in present circumstances isn't identical with our
>approach, say in the late 1950's and early 1960's, but it hasn't changed
>greatly either. Its thrust then and now is against corporate domination
>of our nation's political and economic life."
> Later he says,
> "The policy rests on the fact that large corporations and banks
>dominate the political and economic life of our country as well as form
>the structural underpinnings of the system of capitalism. With their
>economic and political power, these corporate behemoths determine the
>fate of hundreds of millions of people at home and around the globe.”
> And he also states,
> "Stagnating wages and income, high energy costs, rising unemployment,
>skyrocketing rents, privatization of public services, the wage gap,
>strike breaking, persistent racism and discrimination, the corruption of
>our political process, the erosion of our democratic rights,
>anti-immigrant bashing, environmental degradation, persistent and
>growing poverty, and militarist aggression - all of this and more can be
>traced in one way or another to monopoly corporations and banks and
>their relentless search for maximum corporate profits. That's their
>bottom line."
> And finally he contends,
> "The anti-monopoly strategy is our path to socialism."
>
> To that which is implied by these comments I say, No it is not our path
>to socialism, nor has it ever been. This is a petty bourgeois
>ideological approach that is quite acceptable to a large segment of
>capitalist society. An anti-monopoly strategy does not equal an
>anti-capitalist strategy and it is certainly not equatable with a
>pro-socialist philosophy. Sam’s philosophy in this regard is not only
>quite acceptable to the petty bourgeois class but lies at the core of
>many of their preachings. In fact, Sam implies as much when he says,
> "Even some segments of the capitalist class feel the pinch of its
>policies."
> Exactly, and that is why these segments are the strongest advocates of
>anti-trust laws and similar legislation, but theirs is neither an
>anti-capitalist or pro-socialist program.
> Later Sam says,
> "It [the program he is advocating] aims to unite millions of our
>nation's working people and their allies to radically curb the political
>and economic power of the biggest monopolies. It is at once a class and
>a democratic struggle."
> This comment is misleading because it implies a pro-socialist
>orientation is present when, in fact, it is not. Yes, it is a class
>struggle, but a struggle of the petty bourgeois against the big
>bourgeoisie, not of the proletariat against the capitalists, both big
>and petty. Yes, it is a democratic struggle but a fight for democracy
>for which class. The petty bourgeois or the proletariat. Being
>exploited by the petty bourgeois is no less exploitation than being
>exploited by the big bourgeoisie. Exploitation is exploitation.
> Sam states, "We believe that in the course of this struggle to reign in
>corporate economic and political power, the working class and its allies
>will not only gain in experience, unity, and organization, but also come
>to see the necessity of socialist transformation of society."
> That could very well be but were that to occur it would be in spite of
>Sam’s approach, not because of it. If proletarians follow his strategy,
>realizations will come to them through their own experiences and not
>through any information or data conveyed to them by the M-L vanguard,
>because the latter will have been concentrating its energies and
>intentions on convincing the proletariat that the road to financial
>justice lay through curbing monopolies, oligopolies and cartels rather
>than through their abolishment and the institution of socialism.
> And finally Sam states,
> "Furthermore, we have to find and seek out those features that are
>peculiarly American and that have to be taken into account in
>elaborating a strategic path to anti-monopoly democracy and socialism.”
> Again he is equating the anti-monopoly struggle with the struggle for
>socialism. They are not identical and one can quite easily engage in
>the former while having no interest in, and providing no support to, the
>latter.
>
>For the cause,
>
>Klo
>
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
>http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
_______________________________________________
Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
