BTW, in practice, most democratic centralist organizations end up
not
being democratic.
The rank and file end up being manipulated by the central
committee or its leader, i.e., end up being passive followers rather
than
active, democratic, participants.
CB: Most ? Do you
From the Trotsky archive at MIA.
...n the chapter Down With Substitutionism in Party II of the book, Trotsky writes
in what could be a
description of Stalinism : In the internal politics of the Party these methods lead,
as we shall see below, to
the Party organisation substituting itself
G'day Charles,
Sorry, Rob, Leninist democratic centralism is alive and well in
Venezuela , where all power resides with the masses and their elected
representatives in the CENTER ! Viva Bolivarian Bolshevism !
Either we're talking about different 'democratic centralisms' or we're
In leftist theory, democratic centralism refers to the organization of the
revolutionary political party. The theory says that when a party's
membership decides on a policy (a line, a program) it is binding on members
of that party, including its leadership. Though they may disagree with it at
This will be my last message in this thread. It doesn't seem to be making
any progress.
Charles B. writes: Yes, Marshall Sahlins wrote that the politics of the
university is feudal or something like that. You sketch out more of the
details, although, I think you might want to get the lords and
Charles B. writes:
CB: Did you hear the one about long lines at Lenin's tomb
when the SU was breaking up ? People wanted to see Lenin
turning over in his grave.
there are lots of good jokes about Lenin. A lot of leftists in the old USSR
used Lenin and his tradition against the
Charles, I asked Michael P. to drop this thread, and he has. Thanks.
--
Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California State University
Chico, CA 95929
Tel. 530-898-5321
E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
If I reply to one message per day in this thread (as I'm constrained to do),
it will continue until 2010. I haven't even read Miychi's missives yet... JD
I wrote:But wasn't Earl Browder -- a long-term leader who was quite
popular with the CPUSA's rank and file members -- kicked out of the
in the mid-90's. It has
a chapter on one of your canonical works, The Short Course,
of the CPSU, which as Eric Hobsbawm remarks was manditory reading
for Communist cadre.
Michael Pugliese
Date Index
RE: RE: Bureaucracy
by michael pugliese
05 April 2002 01:04 UTC
Thread Index
Earl
http://www.frontpagemag.com/archives/leftism/two_evils.htm
.,..The Soviet tie, according to Schrecker, along with the outrageous
orders that the Party issued to its cadres, did not interfere
with its ability to play a progressive role in American society
and culture.
The small but cunning word
Michael Pugliese cites Ronald Radosh:
http://www.frontpagemag.com/archives/leftism/two_evils.htm
They speculate that, by having the French Communists
appear to be the authors of the condemnation of Browder, the
Soviets may have hoped to avoid alerting American leaders prematurely
to the
I'm not sure that we have much to gain by rehashing the old debates about
Stalinist bureaucracy.
--
Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California State University
Chico, CA 95929
Tel. 530-898-5321
E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Time is fleeting, so let's go greet the fleet.
Charles Brown writes:Why aren't professors bureaucrats too ? What defines
a bureaucrat for you ?
Like any real-world phenomenon, academia doesn't fit any academic conceptual
box exactly. The professoriat has its bureaucratic (top-down
Jim D. did a good job of describing academia as a medieval guild
organization. On the other hand, when it comes to the grant acquiring
side of the university, it becomes untra rational -- perhaps even moreso
than the other forms of bureaucracy. In short, you have two different
mind-sets,
keeping this short, since time is short.
Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
CB: I still don't see any good usage or rigorous usage of bureaucracy in
what you have said. Hierarchy or elite is better for all the purposes
mentioned. And bureaucracy has
- Original Message -
From: Devine, James [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, April 05, 2002 9:12 AM
Subject: [PEN-L:24690] RE: Bureaucracy
keeping this short, since time is short.
=
I thought time is money, now you economists are changing the rules
Devine, James wrote:
CB:Isn't bureaucracy a Weberian and not Marxist concept ? ...
The Pharoah couldn't rule
ancient Egypt without relying on the bureaucracy, so the latter got a lot of
the power.
Historical footnote. Probably in Egypt the bureaucracy (priestcraft)
_was_ the power.
]]
Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 10:21 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [PEN-L:24642] RE: RE: Bureaucracy
1. Why is Weber constantly contrasted to Marx? The whole discussion
of bureaucracy in Weber is an extension of Marx to the degree that the
evolution of bureaucracy reflects a gradual
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [PEN-L:24644] RE: RE: Bureaucracy
Jim...Under the Soviet system, the ruling stratum was bureaucratic:
the leadership
of the Communist Party ruled their party in a top-down way, while
that Party
held a monopoly of political power. (State force
Charles Brown wrote:Isn't bureaucracy a Weberian and not Marxist
concept ? ...
I wrote: The issue is not whether it's a Marxist concept in the sense of
whether Marx talked about it as much as whether it fits with Marx's
materialist conception of history.
CB:Why do you interpret my usage
oops. I didn't mean to send this one. Ignore it.
Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
-Original Message-
From: Devine, James [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2002 9:14 AM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: [PEN-L:24657] RE
I wrote:
Applied to the CPUSA, the phrase democratic centralist involves an
abuse of the word democratic.
CB: Are you saying that the majority's votes were ignored in some election
of Gus Hall ? Earl Browder ? John Reed ? Henry Winston ? Sam Webb ? on a
provision of the Constitution ?
Give
Earl Browder, was ejected from the CPUSA after the publication
in a French Communist journal of the, Duclos Letter, which
accused Browder after the Teheran conference of '44 of being
a liquidationist lackey of US imperialism. See the biographies/studies
of Browder by James Ryan and Maurice
To Control or to Smash Bureaucracy: Weber and Lenin on Politics,
by Erik Olin Wright, Berkeley Journal of Sociology circa '75
or so. Reprinted (I think ) as a chapter of his, Class, Cris
and the State, Verso Books.
Michael Pugliese, g*d knows why I bother posting these cites
here. No one ever
- Original Message -
From: michael pugliese [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 9:44 AM
Subject: [PEN-L:24624] RE: Re: Bureaucracy
To Control or to Smash Bureaucracy: Weber and Lenin on Politics,
by Erik Olin Wright, Berkeley Journal
CB:Isn't bureaucracy a Weberian and not Marxist concept ? ...
The issue is not whether it's a Marxist concept in the sense of whether
Marx talked about it as much as whether it fits with Marx's materialist
conception of history. But see, for example, Hal Draper's book KARL MARX'S
THEORY OF
1. Why is Weber constantly contrasted to Marx? The whole discussion
of bureaucracy in Weber is an extension of Marx to the degree that the
evolution of bureaucracy reflects a gradual transfer of the means of
administration from the individual to the state. Much of Weber's
writing should be seen
Jim...(my late friend al szymanski (sp.?)
Nope, you got it right. He was one of the editors of the journal,
The Insurgent Sociologist now called Critical Sociology. Another
friend, wrote the below.
(After another google hit...)
Michael Pugliese, the creepy one;-)
logical errors of
Jim...Under the Soviet system, the ruling stratum was bureaucratic:
the leadership
of the Communist Party ruled their party in a top-down way, while
that Party
held a monopoly of political power. (State force was mobilized
to suppress
or buy off any opposition.) That is, the Party owned the
Well, yes,...I *am * quite familar with the workings of bureaucracies.
[smile] --both postal and union.
I believe the physics rule of thermodynamics [or one of them]
I view democracy as revitalizing government bureaucracy.
Nat. Ass. of Letter CarriersBill Briggs [EMAIL PROTECTED]
30 matches
Mail list logo
