AUT: Re: ANSWER and the liberals

["Harald Beyer-Arnesen" <haraldba@xxxxxxxxx>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "neil" <74742.1651@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "autopsy" <aut-op-sy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "Neil C." <74742.1651@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: 30. januar 2003 06.26
Subject: AUT: ANSWER and the liberals



Neil, I am fully aware of how different Left Communist
party concept(s).differ from a Leninist one, as well as
the great differences within the Left Communist traditions.
As you mentioned Pannekoek, I am also sure yoou know
he said some very nasty things about the Party.concept
as such.
        But neither I am opposed to political organizations
(in plural). They are natural expressions of the need of
like-minded people of coming together. As such the Midnight
Notes Collective or the Collective Action Notes are
political organizations.
        Burt this is something else than what I still see as a
semi-religious idea of the The Party, which I discern in
the use of the quite metaphysical and very self-important
language as the "proleletarian camp/milieu." It sort of
reminds me of that currents within the Italian Communist
Left at one point taking this kind of metaphysics to its logical
end by decaring that the working class no longer existed
because the Party had ceased to do so.

I also think the critique of such things -- as the likewise
stupefying marking of everything  with circle As by
some -- has some importance.

Another thing, concerning language -- the use of abbreviations/
writing in shorthand, and use of exclusive coded langauge -- is
that this is in fact an international list, where not everyone has
English as their first language. I believe I master English better
than many others whose native langauge is not English. Still I
have no idea as yet what "cdes" is supposed to mean , and it
was first after Ben Seattle's contribution to this particular thread
that I understood that "lib-lab" might mean "liberal-labor".

Much more could be said around this. But I'll leave it here.
Midnight Notes is  btw an example of how it is possible
to write poltical texts without an alienating language. It is
easy to forget that it is as human beings we are supposed
to enter into human communication with other human
beings. A class perspective does not make that less true,
on the contrary.

Harald

> Yes, when I used the abbreviation  "pol"
> it meant -political! Horror of horrors to some
> here . This means then 'politicos' - , which then
> is discovered a "party' which then those means
> a-priori 'vanguardism' which then means
> copy catter 'bolshevism'  which  then = stalinism or
> something close to new state capping operations.,
> Gee, Herald  its real simple isn't it??
>
> I am for Revolutionary Political Orgs coming into
> being out of struggle-- not to take power over the
> class via State monopoly- state capitalism -but
> to being tribunes  in the coming working class
> councils-assemblies  froms of the future -- more along the
> lines of the political  Gorter-Pannekoek  forces
> that fought for the  KAPD  type party idea-- the Dutch
> and German left although
> this has to be brought up to date to cope in the
> globalized capital and the true world class  of today.
> . But the questions remain today of how to build for that future period,
> so the proletarait has a chance to engage capital as a class
> for itself with power, & not only in itself.
>
>
> On the serious side, and past what is really
> pol- as in political -smokescreens.
> Instead of making a big sphatzir   about   2 words,
> we should be dealing with actual class battles
> and actions against capitals solutions that
> are costing workers livelihoods,  bodies and lives
> worldwide.
> Communists that want to be useful to their class
> have to carry out serious pol- as in political work ,
> with the class -social forces in motion and strenghten
> the class strggle trends  alive in the struggles.
> All else is smokescreens and avoidance of
> real dialogue-progress in joining activity between  rev-
> as in revolutionary-
> trends.
>
> I am glad there are some others here into looking at these
> questions anew , and  with critical-open  approaches no less. That
> is a step forward.
>
> The issues can still be addressed
> in the US movements  of dealing effectively with -
> !) the dominance of the rulers left wing , its lib-lab politics  over
> the anti war forces in motion .
> 2) the coming 'support our troops' style
> chauvinist campaign by the bosses  servants /media
> on the eve of actual invasion and occupation.
> 3) showing the capitalist roots of militarism and war
> and effect on the 'home front'
> 4) How can masses build new fighting organizations
> aganst all  the old impediments-
> 5) Showing that communist workers ruled society  is not
> state capitalism .
>
> Neil
>
>
>
>      --- from list aut-op-sy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
>
>



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