Forwarded from Anthony (reply to Martens)

[Louis Proyect <lnp3@xxxxxxxxx>]

(I received this during the furor over Joe Freemen and held off on posting
it until things calmed down. I owe Anthony the respect of cross-posting it,
but don't want it to be seen as a green light to re-open discussion on
Stalin. Frankly, I think that Anthony is preaching to the choir with this
stuff, but he is entitled to getting his words out.)

I want to thank Henry Liu, an admirer of Stalin, for posting the article by
Ludo Martens from the Workers Party
of Belgium attempting to analyse the development of counterrevolution in
the USSR. Below are my comments are Martens' 'Counter-revolution and
revolution in the XXIst century.'

Martens' first paragraph reads,

"Indeed, the capitalist counter-revolution of 1989-1990 was prepared
politically and ideologically by the coming into power of the Khrushchev
group in 1956."

This is true, but Kruschev was in fact a key lieutenant of the Stalin
faction, and so were all of the members of Kruschev's group. They
represented the continuity of the core of Stalin's policies from socialism
in one country (or group of countries), to suppression of inner party
democracy, to bureaucratic economic planning. Their real differences with
Stalin's policies were superficial, aimed at gaining political leverge
against opponents in the party bureaucracy - but without any differences of
principle with those opponents.

Marten's next sentence continues,

"This initiated a radical rupture with the political policies applied under
Lenin and Stalin. All the Marxist-Leninist principles were liquidated one
after another. The revisionists declared that socialism had definitively
triumphed, that the class struggle had ceased in the Soviet Union, and
that, therefore, the proletarian dictatorship against the bourgeoisie and
the bourgeois elements was no longer necessary."

In fact Stalin had declared that in the 1930's the Soviet Union had
achieved communism! so Kruschev's nonsensical rhetoric was merely a
repetition of what he had learned under the tutelage of Stalin.

Martens' continues,

"The struggle against imperialism was abandoned, Khrushchev declared: "We
want to be friends with the United States and cooperate with them in the
struggle for peace and prosperity for the peoples."

This was a continuation of the policy of socialism in one country launched
in the 1920's by Stalin's faction, and formalized in the 1930's. It
included the pact with the KMT in China which led to the 1927 disaster, and
included the Stalin-Hitler Pact, Yalta, membership in the UN, etc.
Krsuchev's efforts at friendship with the USA and Europe were no different
than Stalin's efforts at friendship with Nazi Germany, or (after Germany's
'surprise attack against the USSR), the USA and UK..

Further down, Martens' continues,

"After the counter-revolution in the Soviet Union had taken place, I
re-read the minutes of the "Trial of the anti-Soviet bloc of rightists and
Trotskyites" that was carried out in 1938. During this process, Bukharin,
Trotsky and their followers were accused of using pseudo-revolutionary
language to attack the foundations of the socialist regime. They presented
demagogical platforms in order to rally the former bourgeois and liege
lords and all the forces that wanted the upsetting socialism in the Soviet
Union."

I would suggest to you Henry, that if you want to accuse Trotsky, Bukharin,
or any other communist leader murdered in prison or assasinated in exile by
Stalinism - that you do not use the words that their murderers put into
their mouths - but quote directly from Trotsky et. al.

Neither Trotsky nor Bukharin, nor any of their followers ever advocated
dismantling the Soviet Union, returning it to capitalism, or attacking its
foundations. Nor did they rally the former bourgeois and liege lords.

 For me, these kinds of accusations are made for only one reason: to
justify killing your ideological opponents. This is how they were used by
Stalin, and I presume that anyone who uses them today has no qualms about
murdering other socialists and communists when they disagree with them.
>From my piont of view, Martens' would clearly have no qualms about
murdering most of the people on this list if he had the opportunity. I hope
you do not agree with him about the principles of the Moscow Trials, no
matter how much you admire Stalin for what you believe his achievements to be.

In other words, Martens' polemic is way, way outside the bounds of a
comradely discussion, such as the one I believe you would like to have.


Louis Proyect
Marxism mailing list: http://www.marxmail.org


~~~~~~~
PLEASE clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.