AUT: Re: re: WCPI and WPI etc.

[cerclesocial@xxxxxxxxxx]

All works of Mansoor Hekmat with translations in farsi, arabic, kurdish,
farsi, english, german, swedish, catalan, russian and french :
http://www.m-hekmat.com/

English translations are less than one-tenth of the full work. Some pieces
has also been translated, but are not available on the webpage until now.
The problem is to find translators reading frais and writing english
fluently.

Hekmat's marxism evolved a lot during the 24 years he wrote, from the
founding of the " Marxist Circle for Worker's Emancipation" in 1978 to his
death in 2002. But he their are also any invariances also. As he very rarely
quotes the authors he use - most of them being not available into farsi, the
language he wrote - it's difficult to understand its own inspirations.

Contacts with Bordguism and Maxism-Humanism are more than probable. In the
begining of the 80's, the Union of communist militants was in contacts with
ICC and ICP, and after that Komala (a former maoist group, with which the
UCM merged when they accepted to criticize their own populism) was still
frequently quoted as an example by bordiguist. On a lot of issues, their is
a strong convergence between 'hekmatism' and bordiguism. But, if
worker-communists share common views with ultraleft, its practical approch
of revolution, not as an outerworld absolute, but as something to preprare
now and concretely, couldn't make this convergence real. Mansoor Hekmat
frrequently attack the idological left, and includes explicitely Bordiguism
among 'bourgois communism' curents.

Some points in his writings suggests a wide marxist cultur, with an emphasis
on German ideology, who seems to be the more widely quoted text among
worker-communist. Hekmat views on working-class movement as the only pole of
change n the world could suggest an influence, or at least a parallism, with
some Tronti thesis. In some ways, its reading of Lenin seems to be close,
and sometimes has ambiguous,than in some parts of italian autonomism
('organised autonomy'). There's also a close parralel in the evolve of the
Iraqi groups from classical marxism-leninism to worker-communism.

Influences of council comunism is also clear in later Hekmat works.
Curioulsy, he doesnt' seems to have discuss a lot
(or at least in english), the role of shuras in iranian revolution. But, as
the creation itself of the worker-communist party took palce in 1991 during
the shuras insurection in Iraqi kurdistan, were Komala has military camps,
ihe seems to have take a closer interest in this question of worker
councils. In 1994, he clearrly recognized worker-communisma spart of the
council communism.

But, even if worker-communism is very close to KAPD in some way, he never
argue about german revolution, that  don't seems to know deeply. But he
emphases, like later ultraleft, on the fact that bolcheviks never really had
a communist agenda, and their economical views were those of
social-democracy, ie. national-modernism, statism and industrialism.

I wonder know where Mansoor Hekmat get its few quotes on commodity
fetishism, but influence of Debord is not absolutely out of order (funny
thing : a comrade explained that his syrian father bougtht all plublications
form the situationnist international in a congress of the syrian baath
party, when Syria was critics on USSR bureaucracy....). As it's not really a
widespread thema in marxism-leninism, where else could it come ?

About Lenin, Mansoor Hekmat is very carefull. Asked, in the 90's, if he's
still a marxist-leninist, he explain is full respect to Lenin, as a
practical organizer and revolutionnary leader. Nothing else. He don't seems
to ader to the theories of imperialism (and worker-communism is strongly
against 'anti-imperialism'), national liberationism and so on.  But, as te
leader of a party who clearly seek for the political power for the working
class, he got an admiration of Lenin as the organizer of russian revolution.
This is something very common in ultraleft : see Bordiga, Munis, Lanneret,
first Castoriadis, ...

Knowledge about ultraleft is not really widespread among worker-communists,
even if some are very awre of the close conections that could exists. Most
activists see themselves as marxist-leninists, and can't understand how
western left has become so reactionnary. Mot of all, they are very, very
practical, with a long habit of public propaganda, undergorund work, and
this clear objective : the working class point of view should become
hegemonic in society. 'communism in the margin of society is not communism'.

As I guess most of you live in countries were worker-communist party is
present, I engaged you to discuss directlty with them. on all these issues.

Nico









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