VALUABLE ADMISSIONS OF PROFESSOR MILIBAND (6 of 7)

[hariette@xxxxxxxxxxxxx (hariette spierings)]

IT'S ONLY THE TRUTH, SAID ALICE

The case of the phoney communist parties with parliamentary representation
and due participation in the running of the state's organs, is no exception.
At most, their sole aim is to further develop bureaucratic capitalism in its
most extreme corporate variety, switching allegiance from one imperialist
exploiter to another.  A case of selling the country to Brezhnev rather than
to Reagan.

We see this clearly in the very words of the Peruvian Military High Command,
the bulwark of the state, of the class dictatorship of bureaucrats,
comprador bourgeois and feudalists: "The Communism that is a danger, not
only to the armed forces but to the state institutions is not the United
Left....." said General Julian Julia, the Chief of the General Staff in an
interview published in 1985 by the Peruvian "United Leftist" Magazine "Que
Hacer" (What Is To Be Done!) (Number 34). Julia went on: ".....the danger is
represented by the Shining Path
and those who support them. The communism of the United Left - which the
press has rightly dubbed the Pink Conglomerate - is a Marxism that adheres
to the constitutional scheme.  I don't see any danger in an electoral
triumph of the United Left". We rest our case!.

A JOURNEY TO THE CENTRE OF THIRD WORLD POLITICS

Therefore, Miliband has certainly a point in saying that these are
"depoliticized societies", and almost right in saying that their politics
are based in parties that are mere "bureaucratic shells".

This observation must be seen, however, in connection with Miliband's
admission that a proletariat exists in such countries, albeit relatively
small and "concentrated on the one hand in a number of large enterprises
and dispersed on the other in a multitude of small ones".

Moreover, in Peru's case, such a proletariat achieved as far back as 1928 a
sufficient degree of maturity for, having received Marxism from the
"outside", that is from intellectuals both foreign and domestic, was able to
set up its
own General Confederation of Labour and its own class political party - a
class party with the clear goal of national and class emancipation: The
Communist Party of Peru, today dubbed The Shining Path by its detractors and
enemies, the "lackeys of the moneybags", both domestic and foreign.

Would not such Marxist revolutionaries - leading a Party of class conscious
proletarians - be in a condition to develop a revolutionary theory and a
revolutionary movement that, in Miliband's own words, "remains identifiably
"Marxist"....." "....squarely and adequately derived from a Marxist
problematic"?.

In a country like Peru - a country needing to complete its
national-democratic (or bourgeois- democratic) revolution, stunted by
surviving feudal relations of production and foreign imperialist domination
in order to transform itself into a nation in the modern (bourgeois)sense of
the word before any talk of socialism can make the slightest Marxist sense -
in a country such as this, is it possible to conceive of any other avenue
for the socialist proletariat than to lead an agrarian revolution against
such "feudal relations of production"?.

And, moreover, can this feudalism be ever broken without smashing
imperialist domination which sustains itself upon this very ground,
as well as serving as its prop and ultimate bastion of resistance?.
How can the proletariat ever achieve its socialist and communist
aims within the framework of a semi-feudal and semi-colonial society?

Is this not the fundamental reason behind Lenin's dictum: "Marxist politics
raises the proletariat to the role of leader of the peasantry"?.  Can the
proletariat of any country, however small, remain a class conscious
proletariat while abjuring its revolutionary role?.

Did not Lenin also pointed out: "The transfer of the land to the peasantry
is impossible without an armed insurrection"?

Is it not now clear what the correct revolutionary road is in countries such
as Peru?. Where, in all the vast works of the Marxist Classics, is it
written that the "revolutionary stirrings" of such countries should always
remain just "stirrings", the empty erotic dreams of eunuchs, never to be
fulfilled by victory?.  Perchance, was Lenin wrong in saying: "The duty of
revolutionaries
is to make the revolution"?.

INTO THE WHITE RABBIT'S PARLOUR

Moreover, Miliband himself expresses the very reason why the proletariat,
and therefore the Marxists, must pay special attention to a process such
as the revolution in Peru. Miliband admits that the imperialist "stake"
in such countries "is in fact one of the dominant elements, if not the
dominant element of present day international relations". (Ralph Miliband,
The State in Capitalist Society - the underlining here is Miliband's own).

Therefore, and bearing in mind Professor Miliband's reputation as a
"foremost Marxist", that we were in broad agreement on such points as
the political and social conditions in the Third World, his avowedly
open minded attitude and his expressed desired for unity, we
thought right to approach him for an exchange of ideas, also on this
important subject.

He replied to our letter promising to arrange a meeting after the Xmas
season. At the beginning of 1986 a meeting was agreed for January 7th.

At this meeting our first topic was of course to enquire about Miliband's
own project for a socialist party, independent from Labour party politics.
The party that should be free from "witch-hunts" and avoid "colonizing" the
people's organisations and struggles.

Miliband had only disappointing news: His call, he said had been sceptically
received by his own socialist friends, he mentioned Ken Coates, among others.
Therefore, currently he felt that the idea was not realistic for the near
future.  In any case, there was nothing concrete yet in the offing.

We reiterated our sympathy for such an endeavour and our willingness to
unite on the basis of independent organisation, mutual respect, freedom
to put our own points of view across and criticise others.  We expressed
our view that such a platform to unite "different peoples with different
concerns and passions", and "totally committed to the struggle against
capitalism, racism, sexism and the global counter-revolutionary crusade of
imperialism", a platform to advance the class struggle "in the shop floor
and beyond", and to challenge politically the imperialist bourgeoisie
"without falling into parliamentarianism", certainly seemed to us to be
necessary for the advancement of the people's interests in
this country.  We then requested to be kept informed if any further
developments indicated any possibility of advance in the direction of
carrying out such idea.

AND OUT AGAIN IN FIVE MINUTES

Next, Professor Miliband enquired about Peru. Then our open minded Professor
underwent a visible transformation and began in an accusatory tone: "You are
Maoists!. Why?".

We started to answer the question and were immediately cut off. "What about
the crimes of the Cultural Revolution", Miliband went on, laying it on thick
with abuse.  Two minutes later, and in total puzzlement, we found ourselves
bundled out into the flurry of a snowy January wind blowing at the foregate
of our Professor's ivory tower. Needless to say that we did not have the
barest chance to explain the reasons for our own "different concerns and
passions".  Alas!.


CONTINUES IN SECTION 7



     --- from list marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---