Re: [PEN-L] Strange bedfellows

[Waistline2]

michael a. lebowitz wrote: > What was strange?  A tactical parliamentary alliance vs the IMF's poster > child? Michael, the CP in the Ukraine is just like the CP's that have existed everywhere. They are past masters at class collaborationism. The FSLN and the July 26th movement knew how to operate tactically, not the CP's--at least since the rise of the Popular Front.   Comment   Your answer presupposes that one agree with the unspoken theoretical and political premise, from which you prceed. The CP in the Ukanrine cannot be like any other CP that have exzisted everywhere.   This is not possible because some CP have a history of being controlling parties and others do not.   How the power of those CP's in power was exercised in a totally different question. What you wrote is that the Communist Party of the Ukraine, in its history is no different from say the Communist Party USA, over the course of the last seventy years. The CP of the Ukraine has a distinct history, as does the socialist trend or socialist project in the Ukraine, that is unlike the socialist project and CP in the American Union.   Would it not be prudent to say the CP of the Ukraine was forced to be a master at political collaboration on the basis of who every exercised and informed political control of the property relations?   The point is that Trotskyism and its heritage as a politic and ideology explains nothing in the real world. People want answers that make sense. This is not a question of nuisances but political insight. The nuisances hinge upon a large political framework called "insight" and the CP of the Ukraine is not like the Cp's everywhere else . . . unless you explain the theory of "everywhere else."   Melvin P. --