Re: [Marxism] Khiyana and the betrayal by much of the left of the Syrian uprising

[Andrew Pollack via Marxism]

  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.
*

Thanks to all the Rhodes Scholars :) <3

Of course my primary citation motivation is what these quotes say about the
many stages a proletarian revolution goes through over the course of years
before success (as explained with reference to the MENA region by Gilbert
Achcar).

Another one:

"With the exception of only a few chapters, every important part of the
revolutionary annals from 1848 to 1849 bear the heading: *Defeat of the
revolution!*

"What succumbed in these defeats was not the revolution. It was the
pre-revolutionary traditional appendages, results of social relationships
which had not yet come to the point of sharp class antagonisms — persons,
illusions, conceptions, projects from which the revolutionary party before
the February Revolution was not free, from which it could be freed not by
the *victory of February*, but only by a series of *defeats*.

"In a word: The revolution made progress, forged ahead, not by its
immediate tragicomic achievements but, on the contrary, by the creation of
a powerful, united counterrevolution, by the creation of an opponent in
combat with whom the party of overthrow ripened into a really revolutionary
party.

"To prove this is the task of the following pages."

https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1850/class-struggles-france/index.htm
And don't forget the entire "Address of the Central Committee to the
Communist League

https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/communist-league/1850-ad1.htm
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Khiyana and the betrayal by much of the left of the Syrian uprising

[Einde O'Callaghan via Marxism]

  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.
*

 Thomas via Marxism wrote 
> 
> 
> https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/hic_Rhodus,_hic_salta
> 
> The phrase arises from the Latin form of Aesop's Fables (Gibbs 209; Perry 33: 
> Chambry 51), as translated from Ancient Greek "Αὐτοῦ γὰρ καὶ Ῥόδος καὶ 
> πήδημα" (literally) "Here is Rhodes, jump here!". In the fable, a boastful 
> athlete brags that he once achieved a stupendous long jump in competition on 
> the island of Rhodes. A bystander challenges him to dispense with the reports 
> of the witnesses and simply repeat his accomplishment on the spot: "Here is 
> Rhodes, jump here!"
>  
> Proverb[edit]
>  
> hic Rhodus, hic salta
>  1.(politics) Prove what you can do, here and now.
> 
You're quite correct. This is, of course, the origin of the phrase. But what 
Andrew is quoting below is a famous passage from "The 18th Brumaire of Louis 
Bonaparte" and the not quite accurate translation is the English translation of 
the version given by Marx himself in his original text! 
> 
> -Original Message-
> >From: Andrew Pollack via Marxism 
> >
> >"Bourgeois revolutions, like those of the eighteenth century, storm more
> >swiftly from success to success, their dramatic effects outdo each other,
> >men and things seem set in sparkling diamonds, ecstasy is the order of the
> >day – but they are short-lived, soon they have reached their zenith, and a
> >long Katzenjammer [cat’s winge] takes hold of society before it learns to
> >assimilate the results of its storm-and-stress period soberly. On the other
> >hand, proletarian revolutions, like those of the nineteenth century,
> >constantly criticize themselves, constantly interrupt themselves in their
> >own course, return to the apparently accomplished, in order to begin anew;
> >they deride with cruel thoroughness the half-measures, weaknesses, and
> >paltriness of their first attempts, seem to throw down their opponents only
> >so the latter may draw new strength from the earth and rise before them
> >again more gigantic than ever, recoil constantly from the indefinite
> >colossalness of their own goals – until a situation is created which makes
> >all turning back impossible, and the conditions themselves call out:
> >*Hic Rhodus, hic salta!"*
> >[Here is the rose, here dance!]

Here is the German original of the passage quoted by Andrew:

Bürgerliche Revolutionen, wie die des achtzehnten Jahrhunderts, stürmen rascher 
von Erfolg zu Erfolg, ihre dramatischen Effekte überbieten sich, Menschen und 
Dinge scheinen in Feuerbrillanten gefaßt, die Ekstase ist der Geist jedes 
Tages; aber sie sind kurzlebig, bald haben sie ihren Höhepunkt erreicht, und 
ein langer Katzenjammer erfaßt die Gesellschaft, ehe sie die Resultate ihrer 
Drang- und Sturmperiode nüchtern sich aneignen lernt. Proletarische 
Revolutionen dagegen, wie die des neunzehnten Jahrhunderts, kritisieren 
beständig sich selbst, unterbrechen sich fortwährend in ihrem eignen Lauf, 
kommen auf das scheinbar Vollbrachte zurück, um es wieder von neuem anzufangen, 
verhöhnen grausam-gründlich die Halbheiten, Schwächen und Erbärmlichkeiten 
ihrer ersten Versuche, scheinen ihren Gegner nur niederzuwerfen, damit er neue 
Kräfte aus der Erde sauge und sich riesenhafter ihnen gegenüber wieder 
aufrichte, schrecken stets von neuem zurück vor der unbestimmten 
Ungeheuerlichkeit ihrer eigenen Zwecke, bis die Situation geschaffen ist, die 
jede Umkehr unmöglich macht, und die Verhältnisse selbst rufen

Hic Rhodus, hic salta!
Hier ist die Rose, hier tanze!

Einde O'Callaghan 
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Khiyana and the betrayal by much of the left of the Syrian uprising

[Thomas via Marxism]

  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.
*


https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/hic_Rhodus,_hic_salta

The phrase arises from the Latin form of Aesop's Fables (Gibbs 209; Perry 33: 
Chambry 51), as translated from Ancient Greek "Αὐτοῦ γὰρ καὶ Ῥόδος καὶ πήδημα" 
(literally) "Here is Rhodes, jump here!". In the fable, a boastful athlete 
brags that he once achieved a stupendous long jump in competition on the island 
of Rhodes. A bystander challenges him to dispense with the reports of the 
witnesses and simply repeat his accomplishment on the spot: "Here is Rhodes, 
jump here!"
 
Proverb[edit]
 
hic Rhodus, hic salta
 1.(politics) Prove what you can do, here and now.



-Original Message-
>From: Andrew Pollack via Marxism 
>Sent: Jul 8, 2016 9:58 AM
>To: Thomas F Barton 
>Subject: Re: [Marxism] Khiyana and the betrayal by much of the left of the 
>Syrian uprising
>
>  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.
>*
>
>"Bourgeois revolutions, like those of the eighteenth century, storm more
>swiftly from success to success, their dramatic effects outdo each other,
>men and things seem set in sparkling diamonds, ecstasy is the order of the
>day – but they are short-lived, soon they have reached their zenith, and a
>long Katzenjammer [cat’s winge] takes hold of society before it learns to
>assimilate the results of its storm-and-stress period soberly. On the other
>hand, proletarian revolutions, like those of the nineteenth century,
>constantly criticize themselves, constantly interrupt themselves in their
>own course, return to the apparently accomplished, in order to begin anew;
>they deride with cruel thoroughness the half-measures, weaknesses, and
>paltriness of their first attempts, seem to throw down their opponents only
>so the latter may draw new strength from the earth and rise before them
>again more gigantic than ever, recoil constantly from the indefinite
>colossalness of their own goals – until a situation is created which makes
>all turning back impossible, and the conditions themselves call out:
>*Hic Rhodus, hic salta!"*
>[Here is the rose, here dance!]

>_
>

_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Khiyana and the betrayal by much of the left of the Syrian uprising

[Andrew Pollack via Marxism]

  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.
*

"Bourgeois revolutions, like those of the eighteenth century, storm more
swiftly from success to success, their dramatic effects outdo each other,
men and things seem set in sparkling diamonds, ecstasy is the order of the
day – but they are short-lived, soon they have reached their zenith, and a
long Katzenjammer [cat’s winge] takes hold of society before it learns to
assimilate the results of its storm-and-stress period soberly. On the other
hand, proletarian revolutions, like those of the nineteenth century,
constantly criticize themselves, constantly interrupt themselves in their
own course, return to the apparently accomplished, in order to begin anew;
they deride with cruel thoroughness the half-measures, weaknesses, and
paltriness of their first attempts, seem to throw down their opponents only
so the latter may draw new strength from the earth and rise before them
again more gigantic than ever, recoil constantly from the indefinite
colossalness of their own goals – until a situation is created which makes
all turning back impossible, and the conditions themselves call out:
*Hic Rhodus, hic salta!"*
[Here is the rose, here dance!]
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1852/18th-brumaire/ch01.htm
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Khiyana and the betrayal by much of the left of the Syrian uprising

[Joseph Green via Marxism]

  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.
*

Andrew Pollack wrote: 
> Yesterday I read the two CV articles you mentioned.
> They're boilerplate Stalinism, 

You don't quote anything from those articles.  This shows that you couldn't 
find anything in those articles that denigrated class demands.  And yet you 
won't retract your charges against me, but just keep adding new ones. I'm 
sorry, Andrew, but that's not honorable.

The fact is that the CVO has been fighting Stalinism as well as Trotskyism 
right from our foundation. We have patiently re-thought the critique of 
Trotskyism, and have set forth a modern critique that shows that Trotskyism 
and Stalinism are two sides of the same coin.  (See 
www.communistvoice.org/00Trotskyism.html) 

>there is no meaningful discussion to be had with those who deny
>the revolutionary potential of the working class in general.

This is your pretext for evading the question of whether the present Syrian 
uprising could, if successful, bring socialism. You proudly make general 
statements such as "ONLY a socialist revolution...will stop regional 
barbarism" (your emphasis). But when I asked you how this statement applies 
to the current situation in Syria, what do we get ... silence. 

So I looked to see if I could find what you had written in the past about the 
Arab Spring and socialist revolution . It turns out that you wrote about the 
Libyan struggle against Qaddafi on March 14, 2011. With regard to socialist 
revolution, you wrote that:

 >Beside their willingness to fight arms in hand, the other major weapon the 
>insurgents have is the deepening of their revolution, the development of a 
>program that would make clear to the population in Tripoli that a mass 
>rising against Qaddafi is worth risking, ...

>Such a program would necessarily seek to replace the capitalist economic 
>system with one that serves the needs of the working people of Libya, and is 
>controlled by them. And it would raise the call for a pan-Arab "Socialist 
>United States" spanning the artificial borders that the colonialists erected 
>throughout the Middle East.

>(http://internationalviewpoint.org/spip.php?auteur236)

So you claim that the only major weapon the Libyan uprising had, other than 
the willingness to resort to arms, was a socialist program that called for a 
"pan-Arab 'socialist United States'.[of the Middle East]." 

I don't think this was a realistic appraisal of the situation in Libya and 
the Middle East. Did you really think that a regional uprising for a pan-Arab 
socialist United States of the Middle East was possible in time to strengthen 
the Libyan uprising?

Or was your idea that it didn't matter whether the the pan-Arab socialist 
revolution would take place soon or many years later, since
 just calling for it would strengthen the Libyan uprising? And do you really 
believe that such a call would have been be supported by any substantial 
section of the Libyan masses, either the Arab or non-Arab ones?

Well, now it's 2016. What do you think about the issue of socialist 
revolution with respect to the current uprising in Syria?  Do you still think 
that the only major weapon of the uprising, aside from being willing to 
fight, would be a program that calls for the pan-Arab socialist United States 
of the Middle East?

You charge me with losing faith in the revolutionary potential of the working 
class because I didn't think socialist revolution was a possibility in the 
Arab Spring, and I don't think it is a possibility in Syria at this time. But 
if you think it is, why don't you repeat your idea that the major weakness of 
the democratic uprising is that it doesn't have a  program for the "pan-Arab 
socialist United States" of the Middle East? Or are you yourself the one 
losing faith in the masses? I don't think you can cover this up by silence, 
for it surely isn't honorable to denounce others for not advocating a 
position that you are reluctant to put forward yourself.

There's also the issue of Egypt, which shouldn't be swept under the rug. It 
was raised in Khiyana, and it is an important issue with respect to judging 
"permanent revolution" with regard to the Arab Spring. But you're still 
silent about it:

JG:

> > And he [an-Nar] wrote that "...the events of Egypt, the leftist misreading 
> > of the
> > army
> > coup as the 'next wave' of the revolution and the subsequent bloodbath is
> > such an appalling error that it should provide food for thought for the
> > whole
> > international revolutionary left." (p. 14)
> >

You are stubbornly refusing to don't say anything about this. Do you think 
that people will forget about what happened in Egypt if only you keep your 
mouth shut 

Re: [Marxism] Khiyana and the betrayal by much of the left of the Syrian uprising

[Andrew Pollack via Marxism]

  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.
*

you keep demanding I specify the relationship of forces among and within
classes. Honest revolutionaries can have differences about that, that's why
-unlike Stalinists- we have democratic congresses, branch meetings, etc.
But there is no meaningful discussion to be had with those who deny the
revolutionary potential of the working class in general.

On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 7:30 AM, Andrew Pollack  wrote:

> Yesterday I read the two CV articles you mentioned.
> They're boilerplate Stalinism, and nothing worth replying to without
> knowing if there's anyone out there on the list who would benefit from a
> critique that's not already in the works of Trotsky which I previously
> linked.
>
> On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 12:48 AM, Joseph Green via Marxism <
> marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu> wrote:
>
>>   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.
>> *
>>
>> Andrew Pollack wrote:
>> > "class economic demands, but please, no socialist revolution, it's
>> > premature!"
>> > thank you Joe Stalin.
>>
>> Insulting me, that's your evidence that the time was ripe for socialist
>> revolution?
>>
>> I happen to believe that revolution is a serious business. Among other
>> things, it's a matter of struggle and sacrifice and organization and
>> protracted effort by the bulk of the working masses.  You can insult me
>> all
>> you want, but it doesn't prove that socialist revolution was on the agenda
>> during the Arab Spring. All you are doing is proving that you don't take
>> revolution seriously, and that you don't take seriously the task of
>> helping
>> build a revolutionary workers movement.
>>
>> I note that, while posing as the outraged champion of socialist
>> revolution,
>> you don't actually say whether  the movements in the Arab Spring might
>> have
>> brought about socialist revolution. Why you don't you answer this
>> directly?
>> Do you think that the downfall of the Assad regime would mean socialist
>> revolution? What are the current prospects for socialist revolution in
>> Syria?
>> I give a clear answer to this question in my writing; and I describe what
>> I
>> think socialists should do in a period of democratic uprising. So stop
>> beating around the bush, take a deep breath, and give your answer.
>>
>> > Would you tell the Alexandria shipyard workers in military courts for
>> > striking for renationalization, that their demands must be limited so as
>> > not to scare the (phantom) leadership of the democratic revolution?
>>
>>  This question proves that it is you who believe "that supporting class
>> demands in some inexplicable way cuts across the struggle for democratic
>> demands". You are the one who counterposes class demands and democratic
>> struggle. You are the one who counterposes democratic struggle and helping
>> prepare for a future socialist revolution.
>>
>>  In a previous post you claimed that  I don't support class demands. A
>> honest
>> person would either provde some proof of that or retract the statement and
>> apologize.  I, and other comrades of the Communist Voice Organization,
>> have
>> written extensively on the workers movement and the issue of the
>> democratic
>> struggle and its relation to the socialist revolution. So where have we
>> ever
>> opposed class demands? Have you even bothered to read any of our articles
>> on
>> these subjects? (Hint: you can find these articles at
>> www.communistvoice.org.) If you don't apologize for your false charges,
>> it
>> will suggest that your method of polemic is similar to that of those who
>> support the Syrian regime: repeat the same slanders over and over.
>>
>> > And yes, ONLY a socialist revolution, based on both democratic and
>> > transitional demands, will stop regional barbarism.
>>
>> So what is your assessment of how this applies to Syria? Do you think that
>> the struggle against the Assad dictatorship, if successful, will bring
>> socialist revolution? If you think so, could you describe what are the
>> forces
>> that will carry out this revolution, how strong they are, what support
>> they
>> have among the masses, and would these masses support socialism?  If you
>> think not, then how do you renconcile support for the Syrian democratic
>> struggle with your statement above?
>>
>> If you don't answer these questions, then you are evading the issues. The
>> Arab Spring is a major refutation of the theory of 

Re: [Marxism] Khiyana and the betrayal by much of the left of the Syrian uprising

[Andrew Pollack via Marxism]

  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.
*

Yesterday I read the two CV articles you mentioned.
They're boilerplate Stalinism, and nothing worth replying to without
knowing if there's anyone out there on the list who would benefit from a
critique that's not already in the works of Trotsky which I previously
linked.

On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 12:48 AM, Joseph Green via Marxism <
marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu> wrote:

>   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.
> *
>
> Andrew Pollack wrote:
> > "class economic demands, but please, no socialist revolution, it's
> > premature!"
> > thank you Joe Stalin.
>
> Insulting me, that's your evidence that the time was ripe for socialist
> revolution?
>
> I happen to believe that revolution is a serious business. Among other
> things, it's a matter of struggle and sacrifice and organization and
> protracted effort by the bulk of the working masses.  You can insult me all
> you want, but it doesn't prove that socialist revolution was on the agenda
> during the Arab Spring. All you are doing is proving that you don't take
> revolution seriously, and that you don't take seriously the task of helping
> build a revolutionary workers movement.
>
> I note that, while posing as the outraged champion of socialist revolution,
> you don't actually say whether  the movements in the Arab Spring might have
> brought about socialist revolution. Why you don't you answer this directly?
> Do you think that the downfall of the Assad regime would mean socialist
> revolution? What are the current prospects for socialist revolution in
> Syria?
> I give a clear answer to this question in my writing; and I describe what I
> think socialists should do in a period of democratic uprising. So stop
> beating around the bush, take a deep breath, and give your answer.
>
> > Would you tell the Alexandria shipyard workers in military courts for
> > striking for renationalization, that their demands must be limited so as
> > not to scare the (phantom) leadership of the democratic revolution?
>
>  This question proves that it is you who believe "that supporting class
> demands in some inexplicable way cuts across the struggle for democratic
> demands". You are the one who counterposes class demands and democratic
> struggle. You are the one who counterposes democratic struggle and helping
> prepare for a future socialist revolution.
>
>  In a previous post you claimed that  I don't support class demands. A
> honest
> person would either provde some proof of that or retract the statement and
> apologize.  I, and other comrades of the Communist Voice Organization, have
> written extensively on the workers movement and the issue of the democratic
> struggle and its relation to the socialist revolution. So where have we
> ever
> opposed class demands? Have you even bothered to read any of our articles
> on
> these subjects? (Hint: you can find these articles at
> www.communistvoice.org.) If you don't apologize for your false charges, it
> will suggest that your method of polemic is similar to that of those who
> support the Syrian regime: repeat the same slanders over and over.
>
> > And yes, ONLY a socialist revolution, based on both democratic and
> > transitional demands, will stop regional barbarism.
>
> So what is your assessment of how this applies to Syria? Do you think that
> the struggle against the Assad dictatorship, if successful, will bring
> socialist revolution? If you think so, could you describe what are the
> forces
> that will carry out this revolution, how strong they are, what support they
> have among the masses, and would these masses support socialism?  If you
> think not, then how do you renconcile support for the Syrian democratic
> struggle with your statement above?
>
> If you don't answer these questions, then you are evading the issues. The
> Arab Spring is a major refutation of the theory of permanent revolution,
> and
> so I wouldn't be surprised if you continue evading these issues.
>
> An-Nar wrote in Khiyana that "we believe that this 'useless dogma'
> [permanent
> revolution] has become a substitute for analysis and leads to
> catastrophism:
> the erroneous view that there are only two courses in any historical
> situation -- either proletarian revolution or counterrevolution." (p,14)
>
> He also wrote "So, in the emphatically post-October world after 1945,
> Permanent Revolution as a theory was as comprehensively refuted as any

Re: [Marxism] Khiyana and the betrayal by much of the left of the Syrian uprising

[Andrew Pollack via Marxism]

  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.
*

for anyone interested in supporting revolution in Egypt and the rest of the
region, in understanding the essential link between the fight for democracy
and socialism, for waging the ideological struggle against Stalinism:
Arabic:
https://www.marxists.org/arabic/archive/trotsky/1930-pr/index.htm
English:
https://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1931/tpr/


On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 7:28 AM, Andrew Pollack  wrote:

> "class economic demands, but please, no socialist revolution, it's
> premature!"
> thank you Joe Stalin.
> Would you tell the Alexandria shipyard workers in military courts for
> striking for renationalization, that their demands must be limited so as
> not to scare the (phantom) leadership of the democratic revolution?
> And yes, ONLY a socialist revolution, based on both democratic and
> transitional demands, will stop regional barbarism.
>
> On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 12:40 AM, Joseph Green via Marxism <
> marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu> wrote:
>
>>   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.
>> *
>>
>> Correction:
>> In my last note, the  clause "a situation where, even if successfully
>> they
>> could not lead to socialist revolution"
>>
>> should be
>>
>> "a situation where, even if successful, they could not lead to socialist
>> revolution".
>>
>> -- Joseph Green
>> _
>> Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
>> Set your options at:
>> http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/acpollack2%40gmail.com
>>
>
>
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Khiyana and the betrayal by much of the left of the Syrian uprising

[Andrew Pollack via Marxism]

  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.
*

"class economic demands, but please, no socialist revolution, it's
premature!"
thank you Joe Stalin.
Would you tell the Alexandria shipyard workers in military courts for
striking for renationalization, that their demands must be limited so as
not to scare the (phantom) leadership of the democratic revolution?
And yes, ONLY a socialist revolution, based on both democratic and
transitional demands, will stop regional barbarism.

On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 12:40 AM, Joseph Green via Marxism <
marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu> wrote:

>   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.
> *
>
> Correction:
> In my last note, the  clause "a situation where, even if successfully  they
> could not lead to socialist revolution"
>
> should be
>
> "a situation where, even if successful, they could not lead to socialist
> revolution".
>
> -- Joseph Green
> _
> Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
> Set your options at:
> http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/acpollack2%40gmail.com
>
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Khiyana and the betrayal by much of the left of the Syrian uprising

[Joseph Green via Marxism]

  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.
*

Correction:
In my last note, the  clause "a situation where, even if successfully  they 
could not lead to socialist revolution"

should be

"a situation where, even if successful, they could not lead to socialist 
revolution".

-- Joseph Green
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Khiyana and the betrayal by much of the left of the Syrian uprising

[Joseph Green via Marxism]

  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.
*

Andrew Pollack  wrote
> Assad [an-Nar - the author of the first article in the book--JG]]
> completely misrepresents the nature and history of permanent revolution
> and the groups supporting the theory and using it in their practice.
> 
> The author (and Joseph) somehow have got it into their heads that
> supporting class demands in some inexplicable way cuts across the struggle
> for democratic demands, when the opposite is true and is in fact the core
> of the theory and its implementation. What's more, it is precisely the
> partisans of permanent revolution who are at the core of a regionwide
> convergence of revolutionary socialists who are the best fighters in their
> countries' fight for democracy.

Who said that class demands shouldn't be supported? It's an absurd charge, 
and I defy you to find a single place in my writing or that of Phil West's 
that does this. 

What I do say is that there wasn't a chance in the Arab Spring for socialist 
revolution  or for the formation of workers' states. The Arab Spring 
consisted of extremely important struggles, but they were not going to be 
socialist revolutions or lead to workers states. Only if there is a realistic 
assessment of the actual democratic struggle can one both support it and also 
do the utmost to support any class-conscious working class trend within it. 

Now, I have only been able to read a bit of Khiyana - the review was written 
by a good friend of mine, Phil West, while I am currently reading Bond's and 
Garcia's valuable  book, "Brics, An Anti-capitalist Critique". But I don't 
see where Assad an-Nar denies class demands either.  Perhaps you could point 
out where he does so? 

An-Nar provides a devastating critique of the fantasies and mistakes caused 
by the pattern put forward by the theory of "permanent revolution" that 
"there are only two courses in any historical situation--either proletarian 
revolution or counterrevolution" (p. 14). He says that "What is crucial 
...for the international left is that it not abrogate its responsibility to 
support these democratic movements." And he adds "Only by doing so can it 
create a space to criticise existing leaderships and push for socialist, left 
democratic movement."  (14) I would presume that working towards the 
development of a socialist movement includes putting forward class demands.

Trotskyism went completely bankrupt with respect to its assessment of the 
Arab Spring.  At the outset, article after article on the various struggles 
in the Arab Spring by various Trotskyist groups put forward the perspective 
of either the struggle goes on to lead to a workers' state (or, if I remember 
right, even a regional workers' state), or else it will give rise to nothing. 
This can lead from unrealistic euphoria to condemnation of the reality of the 
struggle. And sure enough, we now have the condemnation of the Syrian 
movement by many groups with Trotskyist theorizing.

A notable example of the influence of the theory of "permanent revolution" 
was that it led the Revolutionary Socialists of Egypt to briefly support the 
military coup against Morsi, which was a devastating mistake. The RS were an 
important force in the Egyptian left and were doing serious work, but 
"permanent revolution" led them to an incredible mistake. They ignored what 
they could see right in front of them about the situation in the working 
class, and the political split that existed among the masses. Instead their 
Trotskyist theory lead them to believe that a further step of the revolution 
had to be imminent. It couldn't be that they faced -- in the best situation 
-- a situation of protracted determined mass struggle to deal with the split 
in the working masses with the Islamists and to deal with the situation under 
the Morsi presidency. No, their Trotskyist theory said that the revolution 
was going to go to a new stage. They let empty rhetoric and false theory 
overpower what they could see of the actual situation among the masses, and 
the actual alignment of the various class forces. 

An-Nar points to the need to make a realistic assessment of what is actually 
happening in the various countries and the state of the working class. He has 
a devastating discussion on such things as the situation in Egypt. I am going 
to have to find the time to read his account more carefully, but I think it 
is quite important that such a critique be made.

As for myself, I pointed out from the start that the Arab Spring and various 
other democratic movements in the last period have taken place in a situation 
where, even if successfully  they could not lead to socialist revolution. And 
at the 

Re: [Marxism] Khiyana and the betrayal by much of the left of the Syrian uprising

[Louis Proyect via Marxism]

  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.
*

On 7/5/16 10:56 AM, Andrew Pollack via Marxism wrote:

The author (and Joseph) somehow have got it into their heads that
supporting class demands in some inexplicable way cuts across the struggle
for democratic demands, when the opposite is true and is in fact the core
of the theory and its implementation. What's more, it is precisely the
partisans of permanent revolution who are at the core of a regionwide
convergence of revolutionary socialists who are the best fighters in their
countries' fight for democracy.


In my view, the article is not directed at Joseph Daher but at John 
Rees, Alan Woods, Jeff Mackler, Tariq Ali et al--those who take Assad's 
side because the rebels do not subscribe to socialist ideas.

_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Khiyana and the betrayal by much of the left of the Syrian uprising

[Andrew Pollack via Marxism]

  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.
*

Thanks to Joseph for this review. I don't know if I said it here or just on
Facebook, but it bears repeating:

* The book in general is a very valuable contribution to our collective
efforts to organize support for, and understanding of, the Syrian
Revolution.

* That contribution is hopelessly flawed by the nonsense in the
introductory article by Assad an-Nar (by the way, no-one on this list or on
facebook has been able to shed any light on who that is). Assad completely
misrepresents the nature and history of permanent revolution and the groups
supporting the theory and using it in their practice.

The author (and Joseph) somehow have got it into their heads that
supporting class demands in some inexplicable way cuts across the struggle
for democratic demands, when the opposite is true and is in fact the core
of the theory and its implementation. What's more, it is precisely the
partisans of permanent revolution who are at the core of a regionwide
convergence of revolutionary socialists who are the best fighters in their
countries' fight for democracy.
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Marxism] Khiyana and the betrayal by much of the left of the Syrian uprising

[Joseph Green via Marxism]

  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.
*

About the betrayal by would-be anti-imperialists 
of the Syrian democratic struggle
--

Below is a book review by Phil West of the recent book "_Khiyana_: Daesh, the 
Left, and the Unmaking of the Syrian Revolution".  (From the Detroit Workers' 
Voice mailing list for July 5, 2016)
 
_Khiyana_ means "betrayal" in Arabic, and this book explores the betrayal 
that the Syrian democratic uprising has experienced at the hands of much of 
the established Left since its inception in 2011. Although the contributors 
to this book have varying political backgrounds, they all share a positive 
view of the Syrian democratic uprising, and they present much useful 
information to support this view. In this review, I will summarize some of 
the useful articles included in the book to show the wide range of 
information presented in it.

In his introduction, "Socialism and the Democratic Wager", Assad an-Nar 
argues that the present-day Left has become so narcissistic that its concepts 
have become irrelevant to real democratic uprisings. And since for the left, 
support for democratic mass movements is its main justification, this means 
that a wholesale rethink of its conceptual basis is necessary. He contrasts 
the events of the Arab Spring with the preconceived notions of the Western 
left, which includes Trotsky's theory of Permanent Revolution. He asserts 
that this theory was developed to apply to conditions under Tsarist Russia, 
and it should no longer be applied under current historical conditions. This 
leads him to address democratic uprisings as a distinct category, as 
uprisings which can be instrumental in paving the way to socialism, but are 
also important in their own right since they arise from immediate needs of 
the masses.

An-Nar writes of the Syrian uprising as a revolution, although it could not 
be placed in the same historical class as the revolutions against Tsarist 
absolutism in Russia in 1905 and 1917. The Syrian masses are fighting against 
a stifling tyranny that prevents them from obtaining even an elementary basis 
for their survival. They need freedom from this tyranny in order to breathe, 
gain experience with the bourgeois trends that have participated in the 
uprising, and build organizations with which to fight for any independent 
class demands. This is a stage that must be gone through if there is to be a 
socialist revolution. But Trotsky's theory of Permanent Revolution pits 
itself against the very idea of necessary stages, not just in Syria but in 
Tsarist Russia too. Not all uprisings are direct class battles; frequently 
they cut across class lines, and become distinct stages of an overall 
revolutionary struggle that need to be carried out in a concrete historical 
context. Trotsky's theory has always been unable to recognise the distinct 
historical character of these stages, and that was as true in Russia as it is 
in Syria.

He goes on to examine the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and the 
political trajectory of Hezbollah with regard to the Syrian civil war. In his 
remarks on the Brotherhood, he notes that they were in a unique position 
after the Egyptian democratic uprising, but they began to lose power because 
they did not break with neo-liberalism. The left in Egypt could not develop 
an independent strategy under these circumstances. With regard to Hezbollah, 
he notes the existence of "zombie Stalinism" or "Stalinism without Stalin", 
as an important aspect of current "anti-imperialism" (what we would term 
"non-class" anti-imperialism). He concludes with some perceptive remarks 
about post-colonial struggles, the importance of socialism from below, and 
some general conclusions about the necessity for the left to support 
democratic uprisings even if they don't seem to be immediate transit points 
to a socialist revolution.

In his initial article for this book, Mark Boothroyd informs us about "Who 
are the Syrian Rebels: The Genesis of the Armed Struggle in Syria". He 
describes the source of the armed rebellion and tells us how it made the 
transition from guerrilla resistance to open war. He gives us a history of 
how the rebellion descended into chaos, with token support from the US aimed 
at co-opting the rebels, up to the present stage during which the rebels are 
trying to regroup and regain their advantage. A key aspect of this history 
was the fact that while the rebels sought aid from outside to fight the Assad 
regime, it was only when the Islamist Daesh group emerged that military aid 
was offered, and then only on condition that the rebels would fight Daesh