Re: China's "Communist" Status

[Carrol Cox <cbcox@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Nestor has provided a fine gloss on Marx's "Struggle." Let me expand
it a bit more by raising a warning about wanting too satisfactory an
answer to the questions originally raised. I speak of what (using
the title of a book published back in the 1940s) one might call "The
God That Failed" syndrome. Actually the syndrome is much older.
It consists on having too pat a conception of what marxism is -- and
then when reality doesn't fit the conception perfectly, it is all
marxism's
fault. It is a god that failed, though it never really promised to be a
god
to begin with.

I am a little worried by one of Dave's statements: "remember, I am new
here." This sounds as though Dave really expects to get "the Truth"
about
marxism and the struggle of the working classes of the world in 10 easy
lessons on an e-mail list. It can't be done, and Dave should be
suspicious
of anyone who pretends to answer his questions in that spirit. I suspect

that is what Nestor means by "There are no freeways to knowledge."

Carrol

Nestor Miguel Gorojovsky wrote:

> El  5 Oct 99 a las 21:26, Boone nos dice(n):
>
> > >Geez. You ask a lot.
> >
> > Questions posed to the right people are the key to
> > understanding... remember, I am new here...
> > >Near the end of Marx's life a New York reporter
> > >interviewed him and at the end of the interview came out
> > >with the question, What is? After a long pause, Marx
> > >answered: "Struggle."
> >
> > >
> > >Will that do for a start?
> >
> > Well, to put it quite simply, no. I was looking for
> > somewhat of a more profound answer... Call me ignorant but
> > I have no idea what the above statement means. If you're
> > willing to explain I'm willing to listen...
> >
> > For anyone who missed it, here was my origninal message:
>
> Dear friend,
>
> The answer was very profound, in fact. What Carrol did was
> to sum up into a single word the basic message conveyed by
> Marx in his Theses on Feuerbach, namely the one that states
> that philosophers have up to this day attempted to
> understand the world, now it was time for them to struggle
> to change it.
>
> It is not a crude slogan, it is stating the essential and
> _necessary_ role that action has in the understanding.
> "Struggle" in this context means no knowledge can be
> attained unless within the active and living framework of
> conscious, engaged and committed action towards the
> realization of socialism.
>
> But then, you may say, aren't these guys circular in their
> position? And we would answer "Not at all, only that there
> is not a single possibility to understand a world we are
> not engaged into. Understanding is a process whereby one
> passes from the abstract to the concrete and viceversa all
> the time".  As Marx said, also (modernizing the language a
> little bit):  There are no freeways to knowledge.
>
> Anyway, if you still feel dissatisfied, let us begin by
> stating that what socialism is after is, at the very least,
> extending to the realm of economic relationships the three
> great banners of the French bourgeois revolution:
> "Liberte, egalite, fraternite".  Do you prefer this rather
> longish and somehow misguiding explanation as a starter,
> now?
>
> A hug and a warm welcome,
>
> Nestor.