RE: questions on theory and practice

["Craven, Jim" <jcraven@xxxxxxxxx>]

Dante wrote:

Thanks, Jim.
But that was precisely what I and my comrades were doing here - letting our
praxis guide us to theory and though I am also know many people who spouted
back quotes for every question we raised, I'm afraid that our more that 30
years of struggle here seems nevertheless to have reached a cul-de-sac.

I was hoping that comrades in the developed countries with their better
resources and longer years of fighting against capitalism may have other
insights to offer from their struggles.


Response: Well Dante, history ain't over yet. We have the same problem here:
people who have given up particular groups or perhaps a whole world view
because the returns or needed revolutionary changes haven't come through.

You said that you were a candidate member in the C.P. of the Phillipines and
that there was more centralism in their democratic centralism than
democratic and therefore you left. Well perhaps you were right. Perhaps you
weren't well grounded in what democratic centralism is really about. I have
no idea. I have some friends who are long-time veterans of the NPA and some
got burned out seeing no light at the end of the tunnel, some left for
ideological reasons and a couple are still at it as far as I know.

Obviously theory is a necessary guide to praxis so that one is applying
maximum pressure where it counts and forming principled rather than
unprincipled alliances etc. But theory is tested, consummated, refined and
developed only through concrete praxis. So if one reads "the classics" there
is still the question of how much applies today in differing circumstances,
how much needs to be developed or even scrapped, and of course there is the
problem of the "real" essence of given theory (every revolutionary group or
group calling itself revolutionary that I know of has all sorts of factions
at each other's throats as much if not more than they are at the throats of
the supposed comon enemy).

One of the reason Anarchism and the "politics of the deed" is so appealing
in the West with cultures of instant gratification and narcissism and where
repression is nothing like that of the Phillipines or Indonesia etc, is that
it can often give the illusion of instant returns on given efforts. Instead
of painstaking mass work, often with few or no tangible "returns" on
revolutionary efforts, we get mass action synonomous with mass results. "We
were at such and such demonstration"; "We did this, we did that..." "We got
media coverage"... But look at the work of the likes of Marx and Engels who
labored analyzing and uncovering the key contradictions, laws of motion and
vulnerabilities of capitalism to arm workers and struggles they would not
likely live to see. When it comes to helping to bring down whole systems,
with increasingly sophisticated andpervasive technologies of mind/soul
control, illusion manufacturing and repression, there is no easy road and no
quick returns on revolutionry activity to be had; this is especially true in
nations or regions surrounded by predatory imperialist and capitalist forces
bent on exterminating any revolutionry activities and revolutionaries.

I have been at it as a conscious anti-imperialist, anti-capitalist,
anti-fascist etc for almost forty years. I have no idea what, if anything,
any efforts of mine have yielded in tangible terms. I have been reading the
classics over the almost forty years, some are useful, some are pedantic,
some are much to do about nothing in my opinion. The only thing tangible
that I can point to is that over those almost forty years I have not
betrayed the cause and never will. Beyond that, is only struggle and which
side are we on; the right theory and praxis we find on our own through a lot
of pain and trial and error.

Good luck on your quest. You obviously have the fire burning inside you. But
there are no easy answers, quick fixes or quick returns in such a monumental
war on a global level.

Jim C

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