Re: economics of communist societies (fwd)

[Fiocco@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Fiocco Laura)]

>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>Date: Mon, 5 May 1997 04:06:53 +0200
>From: batcom@xxxxxxxxxxx
>To: aut-op-sy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Cc: smeatoaj@xxxxxxxx, 106361.1743@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, holliegp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
>    lodolaio@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, 74742.1651@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
>    salman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: Re: economics of communist societies
>
>At 16.49 30/04/97 -0400, Leutha Blissett (oh how funny is to joke with the
>names) wrote
>>
>>
>>Your examples are contradictory. Trotsky abandonned communism in favour of
>>bolshevism. His ideological off-spring did not perpetuate his "mistakes"
>>but promoted reaction. Eg they actively partcipated in supporting the 2nd
>>World War. There is no "descending parabola".
>
>M.jr
>What does it mean "abandonned communism in favour of bolshevism"? Simply
>that I was right in talking about a descending parabola
>GIK-Councilism-moder councilists, as Leutha (or whoever is him) is the
>typical modern councilist.
>
>> Indeed I find it hard to understand why those whose defence of
>>the third International ends with the second congress - i.e. that at which
>>the Bolsheviks stitched it up - want to spend so much time defending
>>Bolshevism. At least the GIK set out to analyse their error, whereas group=
s
>>like C'WO seem to denigrate the Bolsheviks in practice while still
>>defending their name. I don't know if the Internationalist Communist Party
>>has a similarly bizarre position.
>
>M.jr
>I believe you cant understand why for us the Communist International ends
>after the Second Congress: you start from your prejudice that bolshevism wa=
s
>"anti-communist", which is not.
>Has the October Revolution been a proletarian revolution? Yes. (and if you
>say not, well, there is no mean to discuss further)
>Has it been led by the bolsheviks on the basis of the revolutionary
>programme for a soviet state? Yes
>Are the first two Congresses aimed to favour the internationalisation of th=
e
>communist revolution? Again, yes (read the documents please).
>The Third Congress is already on the way out.
>The Italian communist left began its battle there and went forward.... Read
>the =85 "Bordiga Last Fight in the Communist International 1926" in ICR14
>(it's on our web-site) and perhaps you'll understand our "bizarre postion".
>I find much more bizarre the positions of people who denigrate the October
>revolution as a bourgeois one, when the entire class was moving, while see =
a
>"movement" in every jerk of the intellectual strata of the petty bourgeoise
>(e.g. the 1975 Italian movement of Laura).
>Ciao


Ciao, I like provocations!
I never said or thought that the october was not a proletarian revolution.
What I think is that the state which was built up (after the revolution)
was a capitalist state in the form of capitalismo di stato.

What I do not understand is why we have *today* to divide us on the base of
the real or supposed (interpretation) differences emong lenin and trotsky
or whoever, instead of thinking of what we can do *now* to change this
world (get out of this mode of production ie capitalistic social
relations).

If somebody tells me he is trotskist or something else, I say ok, it
doesn't matter, what are we going to do? It will be on what he wants to do
now and here that I will be able to chose if we do things together (I have
no pregiudizi)
ciao compagno
laura




     --- from list aut-op-sy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---