Re: On "Obcure Trotskyism" (Was:Carlos on Stalinism)

[iwp.ilo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx (CEP )]

    First: I changed the original name of the posting because I believe
    you're not discussing my positions on Stalinism, which I will
    explain briefly at the end of this posting, but about my origins in
    "obscure Trotskyism".  First some answers to Louis:

    1.  I'm not adhering to the "Morenoist" brand of Trotskysm.  I
    worked for over 15 years with Nahuel Moreno, until his death in
    1986.  I served in that international tendency as a member of the
    International Secretariat for a number of years.  I had some
    disagreements with him and other members of the leadership over the
    years but I was able to be in the same political movement.  After
    Moreno's death (at the peak of our movement's strenghts) was a
    leadership crisis followed by a factional struggle.  I got expelled
    after I was read a 42-page indictment essentially for defending
    the right of a tendency, I didn't agree with, to express its
    political positions.  For more than 25 years now I considered
    myself a revolutionary Marxist, not a Trotskyist in the sense That
    I see no difference between the two names, nor I called myself a
    Morenoist.  For all practical purposes, however, you may say that
    I'm not a Morenoist in form or content.

    2.  At its peak, the "Morenoist" tendency had about 30,000
  militants (no members, but militants) in about 25countries.  The
  two largest oranizations ten years ago were the MAS of Argentina
  (aproximately 10,000 militants) and the Brazilian section (about
  3,000 militants).  All other sections had between 100 and 1,500
  militants each.  Militants were considered those who have regular
  weekly meetings in a cell, pay regular monthly dues, sold the paper
  and carry ou regular duties for the party in factories and
  universities.  They managed to have, at its peak, elected officers,
  deputies, congresspeople and city council in Argentina, Brazil, Peru,
  Venezuela, Mexico, Bolivia and, I believe in Panama (I'm not sure).
  In the first five years of the decade of the 80s, the estimated
  influence of the tendency (worldwide) was estimated in about
  1,000,000 votes.  The entire international tendency was in the
  leadership of the unions in over 3,000 workplaces.  It was an small
  but growing and influential tendency in some countries, particularly
  Latin America.

    3.  When Moreno died, 20,000 people participated in his burial in
    Argentina alone and memorials were held in other 30 countries with
    many more thousands attending.

    4. Today, only the ruins of that tendency remains.  They are
    probably really active in less than 10 countries and probably their
    number of militants dropped to less of 2,000 worlwide.  As far as
    I know, the Argentinian MAS split five ways between 1988-93.

    5. Louis: I'm pretty much critical and self-critical of that
    experiment.  I do not regret having had the opportunity of doing
    what I did, for the most part.  But I think we were unable to
    hold out to our theoretical and political weaknesses.  Of course,
    I wrote about extensively but I'm not planing to bore you to death
    with it.  The fact that I defended the "Morenoists" against a
    lunatic, fringe pro-peronist coward in this list was just for the
    same reason you did.  In spite of all their, and my, faults, the
    movement stood difficult struggles no likely to be experienced by
    comrades living in imperialist countries ( many of their leaders
    were murdered, jailed, "dissappeared", persecuted by the hundreds).
    I presently disagreed with most of their positions, but I'm still
    supportive of their members who are risking every day their lives.
    I have no personal grudges against them.  I'm not holding my own
    problems or dissappoitments on them.

    6. Moreno "obscurity" can also be disputed, somehow.  His "Marxist
    Logic" I understand is taught in some universities in Europe and
    Brazil.  His books maintains an steady course.  They are still
    selling relatively well in English, Spanish and Portuguese.  I
    personally never regarded Moreno as a theoretician, but as a
    marxist who insisted in preserving some basic tenets of Marsxism
    and Leninism.  I also think he was wrong in his political
    characterizations since 1982 to 1986, particularly his categories
    of "worldwide revolutionary situation", the theses on
    "Revolutionary Dictatorship of the proletariat", but I'm still very
    nuch in agreement with his strategy of "Revolutionary United
    front".

    7. Some oustanding features of "Morenoists": a) They were theonly
    Marxist tendency in Latin America to opposse, and in some cases,
    overcame guerrillaist tendencies (some of which you mentioned,
    Louis); b) Was the *only* tendency in Latin America that, through
    the *revolutionary united front* actually produced fusion of
    organizations coming from different traditions -- at the time when
    nobody was doing it; c) Independently of what happened with it
    afterward, the Workers Party in Brazil was Moreno's idea and his
    tendency the one that convinced Lula and his followers to launch
    it; d) His tendency was the only one to organize international
    brigades during the civil war in Nicaragua to fight alongside with
    the FSLN against Somoza's National Guard in spite of the political
    differences; e) was the tendency that gave Trotskysm a working
    class following taking it outside the universities in L.A.

    8. About my positions on Stalinism:  I changed my mind, I will
    post them separately.

    I hope this post does not produce a flame war.  It is not intended
    to do so.  It just that Louis' posting about "Morenoists" didn't
    seem to be either accurate nor fair. While I have broad
    dissagreements with "Morenoists", the writting-off tendency in
    Louis's writting seemed excesive to me.

    Comradely,
    Carlos




     --- from list marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---

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