[PE]
While it is tempting to engage Albert in a discussion on whether or not
Lenin was in favour of 'defence of the fatherland' (if only to defend
Lenin who isn't in a position to defend himself) I can't help but think
that most participants to this column are more interested in the merits
of Neither's views now. If Albert wants to take up Lenin's views
privately I'll be happy to oblige. I'll limite myself to observing that
opposition to the slogan 'defence of the fatherland' (when this applied
to capitalist countries) was the defining point of Bolshevism.
I admire your restraint in resisting temptation and agree with you (and
a similar remark by
Alister Air) that this is not a useful topic for discussion here and
now. (Though it does
bear on interesting questions about why revolutionary
communists/leftists fight for democracy, that may come up later).
However, my passing remark in response to yours may understandably lead
you to the conclusion that I simply don't know what I am talking about
(as opposed to merely
being wrong), a conclusion which your admirable restraint may have
prevented you from expressing ;-) I will limit myself to assuring you
again that you will find Lenin's "A caricature of Marxism and
Imperialist Economism" an interesting read, and also providing a URL for
it:
http://www.cruzio.com/~marx2mao/Lenin/CM16.html You will also find the
following related work
interesting: http://www.cruzio.com/~marx2mao/Lenin/K16.html I won't have
time to discuss this privately either, as current Neither issues are
indeed far more pressing.
[PE]
Albert says:
Also I don't agree with your assumptions about tactical alliances. They
rarely have anything to do with "shared resources". I think you may
perhaps confusing the issue with the "broad united fronts" periodically
set up by tiny rival lemmingist sects to compete with each other for
recruits. These have no relevance to serious politics.
Paul Esposito: That's fine if all neither is doing is supporting the
right of One Nation to campaign without being made the victim of state
harassment, raising PR despite the fact of a defacto alliance on the
question with organisations like ON etc... But as far as I could tell,
the precise status of Neither, its capacity to speak as an organisation,
its membership criteria etc, its attitude to other parties, and to
candidates supporting aspects of Neithers program remain matters of
debate.
These certainly remain matters of debate and in addition other matters
such as the question of Neither vigorously opposing the undemocratic
attacks on One Nation (not only by the state), and supporting their
right to representation, are likely to remain subjects of debate, even
if you and I are fully agreed on those other matters. After all, despite
our differences, you and I probably perceive less fundamental
differences between One Nation and other parties than many other people
"on the left" who are likely to support the core principles of Neither
but have actually been involved in organizing violent attacks on One
Nation meetings and would have been very glad to see them denied
representation.
[AL]
If we do not have open discussion of policies we cannot function as an
organization and cannot defeat the two party state. If we can learn how
to handle disagreements about policy better
than others "on the left" we could become a VERY significant force.
[PE]
Paul Esposito; This was the point of my original letter.
[AL]
If people want to be in an organization where they agree with every
policy they will find that such organizations are either mainstream or
very very small. (In my case there would probably only be 1 member).
Paul Esposito: That would apply to me as well!
[AL]
Well we are getting along wonderfully :-)
I think the positive nature of the discussion with One Nation supporters
on this list
has also been noticeable.
A process of serious political discussion is beginning here which will
not
always be so easy and has a very long way to go, but could produce quite
remarkable results.
In a competitive display of unparalleled resistance to temptation I will
refrain from
further comment on your additional remarks concerning nationalism
capitalism and racism. Related matters will probably come up more
usefully in the "MAI" thread.
