Re: (Nestor) Re:What is Lüko looking for?

["Nestor Gorojovsky" <nestorgoro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

El Sábado 27 de Septiembre de 2003 a las 20:30,
Mike Friedman dijo sobre (Nestor) Re:What is Lüko looking fo que:

"The answer to your question below (relating to the "guilt" of the 
European and North American proletariat and their "leaderships" for 
not coming to the aid of the Soviet workers, those of inumerable 
other revolutions, and  not overthrowing their own bourgeoisies in an 
opportune manner) is probably yes and no. Perhaps when a definitive 
history of the capitalist period is written, hindsight will allow us 
to judge ourselves and what we could and  should have or not have 
done."

Nestor answers:

Yes, I fully agree, particularly with the last sentence. 

But allow me to explain that I was not placing any _blame_ on anyone. 
I hope that my previous posting has explained this. Please remember 
that all this thread began when I asked that those comrades who are 
seriusly trying to develop a revolutionary policy in the metropolitan 
West look more to their own realities before they begin to pass 
judgement (or, yes, place blames) on other peoples and their leaders.

"In the meantime, it is senseless to "blame" a working class that 
currently  has no conscious sense of its historic interests and 
mission. The U.S.  proletariat cannot be said to be a "class for 
itself." The European workers, with a more advanced political 
culture, still don't possess that sense. Blaming "Western" workers, 
in that case is something like blaming a baby for standing by while a 
mugging takes place."

Well, this is something I used to believe myself, but now I feel that 
some caveats could be made to the above. However, I also think that 
debating on those few caveats would be hair-splitting, so let it be. 
We agree in general. And, of course, I know that we also agree that

"the caps have been able to use the wealth stolen from the colonized 
world to suffocate consciousness among the"Western" workering class. 
Nevertheless, as David and others like Ernest Mandel (I'm reading 
something of his now, so it sticks in my mind) have pointed out,  
European workers have risen, and repeatedly, in the era of 
imperialism, only to be defeated, repeatedly."

Well, yes and no, as you say above. Not "European workers" but heroic 
parcels of the European proletariat, with most of that proletariat 
passively waiting for the outcome (at best).  When I speak about the 
passivity of the European working class (and I am particularly 
interested in the German, French and Italian working class) I don't 
forget, not for a single minute, that there were heroic fractions 
within that class. But, again, the record of the European proletariat 
should warn European cdes. (on this list, at least) not to be so 
harsh with other proletariats and the leaders that sprang out from 
those "really existent proletarians", such as Stalin. I am simply 
begging for some humility. Is it too much?

> 
"And here is where we might also agree, in that the "leaders" (and as 
the saying goes, "un traidor puede mas que mil valientes...") bear a 
mighty  responsibility for these defeats as well as the lack of 
timely responses to world events. We might agree if you would agree 
to differentiate among that amorphous mass you are calling "Marxists" 
and eschew a certain voluntarism."

Yes, we agree. I am not putting every Marxist in the same bag. But 
this does not diminish the fact that you can work for Satan by 
quoting the Scriptures ("Se puede obrar para el diablo citando la 
Biblia"). And the fact that you and me and many more here deride such 
Marxists doesn't diminish their influence a single millimeter. We may 
hate this, but those Marxists find friendlier ears than us. At first 
sight, then, and particularly when even people from our own ranks 
tend to unconsciously align with those "Marxists" we want to encircle 
and expel, Western Marxism tends to appear as single block. Not that 
I believe that. What I mean is that I understand Vadim's point of 
view, and I am sympathetic with it.

"Surely you wouldn't put the Eberts in the same company with the 
Luxembourgs? And even the most astute and integrated (into the class) 
revolutionary leadership can't conjure up an uprising, even in 
support of the first proletarian state, if the proper conditions are 
lacking."

We also agree on this. What I want to trigger is the debate on the 
"proper conditions". Yes, I know that this issue was debated once and 
again. But IMHO the new historical situation urges a thoroughly new 
visit, by cdes. in metropolitan Western countries, of their own past 
of struggle.

"If your main effort, here, is to try to convince comrades in the 
imperialist countries to look first at the role played by their "own" 
in  revolutionary defeats and overthrows, I'm all for that. But, a 
critical  balance sheet can't exclude an examination of the role of 
the bureaucracy in the overthrow in the USSR. Nor the role of the 
bureaucracy in the  defeats of "Western" revolutions."

In full agreement. Only that, I hope, you will concede me that the 
scales have been overtilted (is this English?) towards the debate on 
the bureaucracy. You know Spanish very well, so that you know what I 
mean when I say that "odio a la gente que patea al caído" (I hate 
those people who kick the man on the ground). 

"Interesting that the same subject came up when I was in Nicaragua in 
August during a conversation with my brother-in-law, who was an 
officer in the Sandinista military intelligence, and who still 
considers himself a Sandinista, although he has become rather bitter. 
In his view, the defeat was the result of Sandinista errors [...] Of 
course, in the U.S., the role of a conscious worker was not to harp 
on Sandinista deficiencies, but to harp on the U.S. government's 
role."

Very interesting indeed, Mike. Would it be too much of a request to 
ask German workers not to harp on Stalinist deficiencies but on the 
German government's role in Eastern Europe?

Best,

Néstor Miguel Gorojovsky
nestorgoro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 
"Sí, una sola debe ser la patria de los sudamericanos".
Simón Bolívar al gobierno secesionista y disgregador de 
Buenos Aires, 1822
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 



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