Re: [YCLSA Discussion] The Changing Times Online

[Dominic Tweedie]

Dear Cde Nqobizitha, Greetings to your ever-cheerful and charming self. You know that I am sympathetic to you personally and to your honest and energetic pursuit of political truth, which I have observed, and have had the pleasure of sharing for several years past. I think we may have had an e-mail correspondence like this before, on this forum, that was not concluded? I have forgotten the details What I would like to contribute, now, is not to contradict you, or Comrade Frank Talk, or any of the others, but just to wonder whether any of us have really arrived at a clearly defensible understanding of this question, in general terms. In particular terms it could be the relationship between the SACP and the ANC, as you say, or the relationship between a possible Zimbabwean Communist Party and other structures, or the relationship between the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, and the Soviets. In general terms it is the relationship between the vanguard and the mass. In terms of "the classics" this discussion is elaborated following the publication of Eduard Bernstein's "Evolutionary Socialism" in 1898 or 1899, followed by Rosa Luxemburg's lambasting of Bernstein in her book "Reform or Revolution" and soon after that, Lenin's "What is to be Done". There were further exchanges between Luxemburg and Lenin, which we may leave aside for now. Let's just say that it is all searchable on the Communist University Blog. To cut a long story short, the vanguard is not a substitute for the mass. Nor is the mass an alternative to the vanguard. Further, the vanguard party of the working class is not equivalent to any other party. It is not like a bourgeois party, particularly because a Communist Party does not seek power. Bourgeois parties contend with each other to have temporary power over the bourgeois state, for bourgeois purposes. The bourgeois political system is about "spoils" of victory. We, the communists, are not in that game. There is no question of a communist party, as a ruling party in the bourgeois sense, running a bourgeois state, on behalf of the bourgeoisie. This does not exist. This is why from my point of view, it seems that both Frank Talk and yourself may be arguing from the same false premises. Why didn't the working class take over, you all seem to ask, and feel obliged to answer, giving circumstantial reasons, some seeking to blame, others to escape from blame. Lenin argued that the trade union movement could not produce a political determination, or organisation, that could achieve a working-class ascendancy. This was at the time that the Labour Party, coincidentally, was arising out of the British Trade Union movement. Thee are plenty of other examples where what Lenin said, came true. The MDC is one of those. I think you are correct, Cde Nqobizitha, to say that Zimbabwe needs a vanguard party of the working class. But if you think that such a communist party can replace a party like the MDC, or in South Africa that the SACP can replace the ANC, then you are mistaken. If Frank Talk thinks that the MDC was ever going to be a revolutionary party, he is also mistaken. If Frank Talk thinks that Zanu-PF is a revolutionary party of the working class, he is equally mistaken. Where I think you are more correct, and where I think Frank Talk is not correct, is that the masses always have to be respected, and the MDC is a mass party, and it has to be respected as such. Asikhulume! VC Nqobizitha Mlilo M wrote: cde Frank Look my leader, lets engage the issues and provide substantative facts rather than subjective issues. I have consistantly, on this forum, requested that there be evidence that the MDC is anything other than a genuine product of the people of Zimbabwe. That is all i have requested. You make sweeping statements and insinuations on the strategic objective and the reasons the MDC was formed which have no basis in fact but rather are mere products of malicious propaganda. I am saying the formation of the MDC was a product of the consulation process led by the trade union which produced a document called the Raw Data. This Raw Data captured amongst other things that the land question must be addressed. It also said there was need of a broad church political organisation that would fight the dictatorship and address the completion of the ideals of the struggle against colonialism. Remember my leader that the trade union was in alliance with zanu pf and when the differences sharpened with the trade union speaking to the land issue, Mugabe insulted and arrested them and told them to go form a politic party. That answers your question on why we didnt fight from within. It also effectively restates that the MDC was a product of the masses of Zimbabwe. Why the MDC did not pronounce itself as a communist party is politically self evident from a political tactical perspective. The working class while still weak needs allies and a broad church, just as the ANC in South Africa is needed. I think its quite obvious. Issues of personal interests therefore do not arise therefore given the above. I invited you to read the website and documents of the MDC and not take positions based on propaganda. It will make our debates easier and focused. Amandla -- You are subscribed. This footer can help you. Please POST your comments to yclsa-eom-forum@googlegroups.com or reply to this message. You can visit the group WEB SITE at http://groups.google.com/group/yclsa-eom-forum for different delivery options, pages, files and membership. To UNSUBSCRIBE, please email yclsa-eom-forum-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com . You don't have to put anything in the "Subject:" field. You don't have to put anything in the message part. All you have to do is to send an e-mail to this address (repeat): yclsa-eom-forum-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com .