Re: Bordiga and stalinism

["Marcus Strom" <MSTROM@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> From:          Mauro junior <mauro.jr@xxxxxx>
> Subject:       Re: Bordiga and stalinism


This is beautiful communist politics.....

    .............. all those sectoids out there big or small. Read
this! Again!

> Mauro jr:

> The party, ......- is the free
> association of militants on the ground of the revolutionary program. It is
> made of cadres who share the same "analytical" method (marxism) the same
> theoretical foundations and the political positions.

[snip]
I'm not sure that people must share the same political positions. But
act in unity

The party is, a part of
> the class ok, but the political organ of the revolutionary class, which has
> the political leadership (look political leadership is not military command)
> of the class. It is a fundamental point of the revolutionary marxist
> programme that the revolution is made by the class in all its stages - the
> assault beeing the first step/condition. That means that the mass organs of
> the class (the soviet, the councils and we'll see in future the new types of
> councils), trough their own centralisation, constitute the semi-state. The
> political leadership of the party inside the councils is the condition of
> the revolution, in the sense that the loss of such a leadership, the loss of
> confidence of proletariat in the communist arty means either the the party
> is no more communist or the class has withdrawn from its revolutionary
> stance (it might occur).The condition for gaining the leadership through the
> political battle inside the class is that the party works unitarily: every
> and any militant represent the party.

And yet I disagree with the below. If the party is the 'free
association of militants', then any member should be able to fight in
the party for a position shouldn't they. It is practice which will
sort people out, not a bureaucratic rule. Any opportunist can agree
with anything to their hearts content - as long as it gets them where
they want to go. The difference in a communist party is that if they
aren't being communists in practice, then they will stick out like
sore thumbs.

Some people who want to leave politics find the big difference to
debate out to leave. We should not give them the excuse. Rule 21
gives them the excuse. They should be excluded on their political
practice, not their bureaucratic adherence to some rule.

> Well, the 21 conditions (or the first 20 conditions if you want)are not a
> "tactical" are not something on which it is possible to have differents
> opinions amongst different militants. They are the general political linea
> which characterize the International.
> Expulsion could be seem an hard word or an hard fact, but in those
> conditions meant simply "who doesn't share the very bases of the
> International must be free to make an other politics, in an other 
> organisation".
> More, I translate the point 21 from my italian text:
> "The members of the Party who reject the conditions _and the thesis_ (my
> stress) decided by the Communist International must be exluded from the
> Party. The same is valid for the delegates to the extraordinary Congress".
> Look, the Thesis of the International. How can one be member of something
> which one refuses of the costitutional Thesis?


     --- from list marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---

     ------------------