Re: A defense worse than the deed

[Louis N Proyect <lnp3@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, 24 Jul 1996, Doug Henwood wrote:

>
> Now, capturing the state is certainly no index of political wisdom or
> virtue. But for a tendency that claims to have special access to revealed
> truth, both theoretical and practical, why don't the Trots have a more
> impressive track record?
>

Louis: The key to understanding their sterility is the legacy of
Trotskyism as a "critique" of Stalinism and everything that is
non-Trotskyist. Leaving aside the merit of his writings, Trotsky seems to
be emblazoned in the consciousness of these folks as a paradigm. All he
did in the 1930s, and probably all he could do, was expose Stalin.

This then is understood as how to do Trotskyism. Expose, expose, expose.

It is left to other people to dirty their hands in the mass movement. The
group I belonged to--the SWP--had two brief flings with the mass movement.
Organizing the teamsters in the 1930s and the antiwar movement of the
1960s. Now they seem to have their true niche. Expose, expose, expose.

Jim Miller, our one and only worker-Bolshevik, puffs out his chest and
says, "See, we were the first to expose Sandinista betrayal." Hugh Rodwell
puffs out his chest even further and says, "We can top that. We knew they
were rotten all along."

What neither of them seem to grasp is that they are in no position to
criticize anybody since they belong to sects that have no impact on the
mass movement whatsoever. If there's one thing I accomplish in my life, it
is to wrest the word "vanguard" out of their vocabulary.



     --- from list marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---