Marxism
mailing list archive
[ Other Periods
| Other mailing lists
| Search
]
Date:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Thread:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Index:
[ Author
| Date
| Thread
]
Re: Bolshevism vs Menshevism?
- Subject: Re: Bolshevism vs Menshevism?
- From: Adam Rose <adam@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 6 Jun 96 14:41:34 GMT
> The party-building methodology of the Comintern was problematic to begin
> with.
The early years of the Commintern are one of the most fruitful sources
of lessons on strategy and tactics : ultra leftism, the united front,
national question, soviet power vs parliament, etc.
I don't think you should be ambivalent about this heritage.
They did have to improvise rapidly - and it nearly worked. But yes,
the lack of a tried and tested, rooted and independent cadre in Germany
did in the end prove decisive.
Rosa Luxembourg, despite her political struggle against reformism,
did not draw organisational conclusions early enough. So, after the
premature uprising in Russia, Lenin was confident enough in the Bolshevik
cadre to go into hiding, saving his life and the revolution.
After the German workers' premature uprising, in 1919, Luxembourg felt she
had to stay, because she knew there was no firm organisation on the
ground.
The living, revolutionary link between the second and third internationals
could only be preserved by breaking from it.
Adam.
Adam Rose
SWP
Manchester
UK
---------------------------------------------------------------
--- from list marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
- Thread context:
- Re: Bolshevism vs Menshevism?, (continued)
- Re: Bolshevism vs Menshevism?,
Adam Rose Thu 06 Jun 1996, 08:47 GMT
- Re: Bolshevism vs Menshevism?,
Karl Carlile Thu 06 Jun 1996, 08:49 GMT
- Re: Bolshevism vs Menshevism?,
Adam Rose Thu 06 Jun 1996, 09:06 GMT
- Re: Bolshevism vs Menshevism?,
Adam Rose Thu 06 Jun 1996, 14:41 GMT
- Re: Bolshevism vs Menshevism?,
Adam Rose Thu 06 Jun 1996, 15:20 GMT
[ Other Periods
| Other mailing lists
| Search
]