Re: M-TH: Re: Lenin and the working class again
LO, > This is difficult and fraught stuff, comrades. And worth talking about for > as long as it takes. But let's try to keep the arguments in focus and > afford each others' personalities and perceived intentions a generous > reading. Most Thaxists agree with each other about more things than we > would with the majority of punters at our local pubs, so let's not have a > brawl here, eh? > Appologies Mods. I'm normally a very fluffy debater, but being called a liar pushes my buttons, appologies to george as well, he probably didn't deserve my response, and I withdraw my gratuitous insults unreservedly... Bill. --- from list [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---
Re: M-TH: Lenin and the working class again
Lo Again, >>Not at all - who said anything about spontaneously revolutionary? What we have to do is conscientiously and consciously buoild a mass movement for >>revolution, it won't happen until the working class is willing and conscious for change. How could we have a succesful revolution with a vanguard? Make the >>programmers work at gun point? It would degenerate into tyranny, it cannot work. the only way the workers can be free is if we consciously free ourselves, >>not have someone lead us to it, or do it for us. Pace Trotsky, the revoluion is *not* made by teh minority. Dread Lord Deathy. >This is just another way of saying that you dont want social revolution and will therefore doing nothing to advance it. Your >peprspective is nothing but a disguised way of promoting capitalism and maintaining the working class in their present >conditon. Cobblers - I work hard enough towards social revolution, almost continually, and you won't find more vehemently anti-capitalist band than me and my comrades, we've only spent most of our political careers opposing attempts to reform capitalism - our one idea is, after Marx, that we believe that teh social revolution must be made by the workers themselves. I'd prefer evidence advanced rather than ad hominem accusations, maligning my honesty and integrity - call me wrong, but do not call me a liar you fuck, ok? Deathy.
Re: M-TH: Lenin and the working class again
LO All, George: If the working class is, as you claim, "potentially revolutionary" then there is no guarantee that it can spontaneously turn revolutionary which is why a vanguard party is necessary. You hoist yourself with your own petard. Not at all - who said anything about spontaneously revolutionary? What we have to do is conscientiously and consciously buoild a mass movement for revolution, it won't happen until the working class is willing and conscious for change. How could we have a succesful revolution with a vanguard? Make the programmers work at gun point? It would degenerate into tyranny, it cannot work. the only way the workers can be free is if we consciously free ourselves, not have someone lead us to it, or do it for us. Pace Trotsky, the revoluion is *not* made by teh minority. Dread Lord Deathy.
Re: M-TH: Lenin and the working class
Lo Again, >>They are condemned, then, to being revolutionary. We are condemned, King Lear like, to the duty and possiblity of revolution, it is something that is irrevomovable from our condition, but we have to choose to exorcise it. >>Now in the north of Ireland there exists thousands upon thousand of workers who would describe themselves as Protestant Unionists and who actively support British imperialism together with the rampant and intense discrimination against Catholic workers from the same geographical location. Many of these Protestant workers are proud members of the reactionary Orange Order. These workers have adhered to this reactionary counter-revolutionary culture for over a hundred years. Such workers can hardly be described as inherently revolutionary. Indeed, police officers are workers, but I wouldn't consider a police officer inherently revolution - its absurd as sayign all wopmen are inherently feminist. But, and I do have a big but, we are all potentially revolutionary, and this is why a vanguard is not only udnesirable, but also unnessary, when consciousness and necessity co-incide the revolution will happen - our job here and now is to promote consciousness as widely as possible. Deathy
Re: M-TH: Lenin and the working class
Title: Re: M-TH: Lenin and the working class LO Again, >>This wasn't just Lenin's assumption. It was Marx's and Engels's too. The same way as the bourgeoisie was inherently revolutionary in relation to feudalism. The historical role of the bourgeoisie was to emancipate itself from the chains of feudal property relations. Which it did. That did not mean that the bourgeoisie were inherently revolutionary, it meant that their material basis had the objective potential for creating a capitalist revolution, and that the progress of history would place them in the position of having to enact that revolution - that is different by far from the idea that the working class would automatically have their revolution if freed from the ideology of the capitalist class - a working class revolution requires the conscious awareness and determination of the working class, not their unconcious and inherent activity in the world. >>The rapist comparison is stupid. "You know what she *really* wants, don't you?" "She was asking for it..>" "All women want it really", "It is the objective historical function of women to fuck." the last highlighting the actuality of the philosophy - whilst the inherent historical tendancy of human beings is towards fucking, it does require their conscious subjective engagemnent of the human being. >>If any social force can be compared to a rapist today it's the imperialist bourgeoisie. The violence of the working class should be aimed at dispossessing this bourgeoisie, ie at stopping its depradations. This is pure self-defence and what the feminist movement (or the more militant wings of it) have been advocating for women for a long time. The role of the working class is that of women in general compared to militant feminists in this particular comparison. And who would argue against the mass of women being empowered to defend themselves against the gender enemy? Indeed, but that is different from some jumped up vanguard running along, putting guns to our heads and saying they're in charge. >>It's enough to speak of Lenin's vanguardism. Elitism has nothing to do with it. Well, élite and superiority is inherent in the vanguard concept. Bill MArtin (S.P.G.B)
Re: M-TH: Lenin and the working class
LO All, >>Consequently it would seem that Lenin's vanguardist elitism was a necessary tool. But the theory of the vanguard is predicated on Lenin's (false) assumption of an inherently revolutionary working class - i.e. that if the working class is objectively revolutionary, then the actions of the vanguard on their behalf - whether they consciously want it or not - is the fulfillment of their historical role. Strangely, this is also the argument used by many rapists.
Re: M-TH: Cliffite ISO/SWP squabble, What's going on?
Lo All, >>The state caps have been throwing around a lot of "Stalinists" stuff lately, but I must admit that the letter by the ISO is really interesting. The only thing appearing to be lacking in the letter is the call by members to turn in anyone who is a suspect.. In fact it appears that they treat their memberrship as a herd of cattle rather then and organization of professional communists capable of thinking for themselves. Not all adhereants of the State Capitalist thesis are cliffites tha knowest! >>Gonna be real interesting to watch and organization built on capituation to cold war anti communism with its line of state capitalism trying to find a new line as inter imperialist rivalry grows. I think they are much more affected by the end of their capacity to acts as paracites on teh Labour party, which haas availed itself of the post-col-war era to shift itself to the right, etc. >>Well that something else which for years previously was and adaption to their *own* bourgeoisie against the deformed and degenerated workewrs states is now becoming a conflict for them of which way to go. Such adaption, I should think, was more a reflection of their shift-in-the-winds reformism, rather than any reflection of the State Cpaitalist thesis, which does not necessitate taking sides in imperialist rivalries - and, incidently, by teh state cap. thesis, any bugger siding with the USSR was just siding with another bourgeoisie, anyhow, so I think someone round here has a severe case of pots and kettles... >>Cliffism and the state capitalist theory is dead along with its Social Democratic counter parts. In fact the destruction of the SU which was the starting point of the state capitalist break with revoluitionary marxism in the last world war will now at best be national organizations becoming the leftwing social patriots of their *own* countries and the real fight probably won't even be between let's say the American ISO and the British SWP. It will be with there German/Japanese sections most likely.. Now, this I resent - there is nothing implcit in the state capitalist thesis which necessitates supporting one bourgeoisie over another. Try being concise in your venoem, it makes for more entertainment my dear. Yours for Socialism, Bill Martin (SPGB).
Re: M-TH: Third Socialist Councillor elected in Britain
Lo All, > Standing under the title Socialist Alternative (because > the electoral registration office still prevents the SP from having the > democratic right to stand under its own banner), Would this be the democratic right to stand under the name of a long-time pre-existing party? Bill Martin, Socialist Party. --- from list [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---
Re: M-TH: Gusmao and East Timor
Dear George, -- > The fact that Gusamao has apparently asked the remaining Indonesians settlers to > stay in East Timor is an indication of the reactionary politics of this man. > Again nationalism betrays the cause it is supposed to promote. He is only some > days back in East Timor and already he is selling out. It would be interesting > to hear from comrades on this list what the East Timorese resistance > movement's programme is --more and more help from Washington I suppose. > How could he not sell out? He is the nominee of a certain bloc of capital to run the area, much as happened with that Kosovan intellectual who sprang out of nowhere, unelected. It is not that the person is there to rpresent "their people" but to provide the necessary political interface between rulers and ruled. The British empire, during decolonisation, had a very simple ploy: anyone causes trouble, lock 'em up. If there is an uproar to release them, then they are the new rulers. Kwame Nkrumah was an excellent example of this strategy. Capitalism is, by and large, about the great mass of people participating in their own exploitation, and this requires that legitimacy be provided. They could be offered Mickey Mouse, if that was popular, and vote for him; what matters is that there is legitimacy. Simon --- from list [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---
Re: M-TH: WTO and value
Dear all, -- > The World Trade Organisation negotiations with China is clear evidence that the > law of > value does not operate in an unadulterated fashion. It is evidence that there > is no such > thing as free trade in any comprehensive sense. Are we talking about the same law of value here? It is bourgeois economics which tries to kick sand in workers' eyes with the price=value argument. All value comes from human labour. Even the Russian's admitted this, as early as Stalin in 40-41 (ghostwritten...) and their problem in calculation was precisely that, rather than suspend the law of value, they had to second guess it! Prices is the means whereby the ruling class divide up the surplus, as I put forward in an earlier post: it also affects the working class in that they are the proprietors of their labour, and as the price for their labour falls a percentage will starve, while during a rise a percentage will do well, unless for them the rule of price is suspended and they get what is required to maintain their labour through some more or less comprehensive welfare system, in the same way that the state runs certain vital services to ensure that rather than being subject to the vagaries of price they can be relied on, e.g. fire services. And free trade, access to surplus via political power,... what does it matter to us as workers? A politico will respond to a shareholder by trying to limit finance capital, and the reverse also. This is about the ruling class's access to our surplus which they have exploited from us. Consequently to try to apply Capital to the contemporary world > economic situation > in any pure way will simply produce conceptual abstraction. Actually, I find Marx's analysis far more penetrating than those who claim descent from him., Simon Only messages signed by a Party officer are considered official communications --- from list [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---
