Re: [Marxism] The Teixeira thesis

["Marvin Gandall" <marvgandall@xxxxxxxxxx>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Louis Proyect" <lnp3@xxxxxxxxx>
To: "Activists and scholars in Marxist tradition"
<marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, March 06, 2004 5:24 PM
Subject: Re: [Marxism] The Teixeira thesis


> Marvin Gandall:
> >I don't recall making reference to Kautsky, although I do remember
> >saying I would like to find time to reread the Menshevik critique of
the
> >Bolsheviks as "adventurist" in light of the subsequent short-lived
> >course of Soviet history. I'd add that given the world situation at
that
> >time I don't think it was unreasonable of the Bolsheviks to have
seized
> >power in anticipation it would spark revolutions in the West. Without
> >the benefit of hindsight available to us now, I expect and hope I
would
> >have been with them.
>
> Without the benefit of hindsight? What are you trying to say? That if
you
> were in Russia in 1917 and could have foreseen how things would have
turned
> out, you would have opposed the seizure of power? I hate to even ask.
>
> >But I don't mind removing the quote marks around "reformist" if you
> >prefer that I do. I didn't intend it as a "scare quote". I think I
> >explained previously that I don't describe myself as a "social
democrat"
> >or "reformist" because a) I don't believe as a matter of principle
that
> >there can be a a peaceful, parliamentary road to socialism - which I
> >understand to mean the political and economic expropriation of the
large
> >property holders, and b) I believe I would move, with many others,
> >towards revolutionary solutions if capitalism broke down and was no
> >longer capable of delivering modest job and income growth and
tolerable
> >living standards for most working people.
>
> The real dividing line between reformists and revolutionaries is not
over
> "a peaceful road to socialism" but how to orient to the Democratic
Party in
> the here and now. In tomorrow's NY Times Magazine, there's an attack
on the
> Nader campaign by Sean Wilentz of Dissent Magazine and The New
Republic
> (now there's a combination for you.) The fundamental CLASS question in
the
> USA is the Democratic Party. For the past half-century at least, every
> single social movement and the trade union movement have been set back
by
> orienting to the Democratic Party. I am now reading Jeff St. Clair's
"Been
> Brown So Long to Me that it Looked Like Green to Me" for an upcoming
issue
> of Swans. The collaboration between inside-the-beltway environmental
> organization, timber and mining companies and the Clinton
administration is
> enough to make you retch. These people are not just enemies of the
working
> class. They are enemies of every living and breathing thing, including
> Bison and wolves.
>
> >But isn't this true of yourself and everyone else on the list, as
well?
> >How can it be otherwise in the absence of a pre-revolutionary
situation,
> >when all of our practical activity is necessarily "reformist" -
whether
> >it be in the unions or in the international solidarity,
environmental,
> >and other movements, or through participation in pro-capitalist
parties
> >like the Democrats or, in your case, the Greens?
>
> You are confusing "revolutionary" with "insurrectionary". I thought
that
> you would have known the difference. Apparently not.
>
> >In fact, you acknowledge as much. You write "if down the road a
> >revolutionary formation based on a new awareness comes into being,
I'd
> >probably join it. But right now I couldn't find the time.if millions
of
> >working people were gravitating toward independent political action
> >while engaging in militant strikes and mass actions, I'd not be
pushing
> >for support of the Green Party."
> >
> >I understand this - it reflects my own position - but unfortunately I
> >don't think you've grasped the corollary that if and when this
happens,
> >you'd be much better positioned in the DP where the
> >politically-conscious trade unionists would begin their journey, and
> >where you presumably would have had a prior opportunity to earn their
> >confidence.
>
> The politically-conscious trade unionists would be exactly the same as
they
> were in the 1930s, fighting tooth and nail with the National Guard,
scabs
> and other enemies deployed by the Republican and Democratic Parties.
This
> time around, I would hope that the CPUSA has so little difference that
it
> won't persuade workers to retain loyalties to the "lesser evil". Of
course,
> we revolutionaries will have a fight on our hand with those who preach
> class-collaboration using Marxist jargon.
>
> >  You instead view "the art of politics" as standing outside
> >their plant gates and convention halls selling your broadsheet along
> >with competing handfuls of other revolutionary- and Green-minded
> >intellectuals and students. From your point of view, this makes sense
> >because you refuse to accept there is a long and continuing
historical
> >relationship between the labour movement - right down to the
secondary
> >leadership and activists - and the Democratic party.
>
> Selling my broadsheet? I think you are thinking of the Spartacist
League
> rather than the Green Party. Plus, I don't deny that there is a
> "relationship" between the labour movement [sic] and the Democratic
Party.
> We can only look at the trail of broken promises going back to NAFTA
and
> welfare "reform" to know that the relationship is based on deceit.
Radicals
> are trying to expose the treachery of the Democratic Party, while
> reformists are trying to maintain illusions.
>
> >Apart from your current infatuation with the Greens, the only other
> >difference I can see between us is that, to your way of thinking, you
> >are also engaged in the revolutionary activity of building a
"Bolshevik
> >party". You are wrong to suggest I "hadn't figured out" that this is
> >what you are deep down "pushing for", although I have no knowledge of
> >what it is you are actually involved in away from marxmail and the
> >Internet.
>
> My political involvement is here and now on this mailing list. I have
also
> been invited to submit a book proposal to a British publisher and will
> probably present something on "Lenin in Context". If I can write that
and
> keep this mailing list on an even keel, that's about as much as I can
> handle. I have a full-time job and will be forced to begin working 6
days a
> week next week. That's a plenty.
>
> >  Clearly, I don't find such activity either necessary or
> >rewarding in present circumstances, as you do. I'd be reluctant to
> >describe myself as a "Bolshevik" in any event, a term I associate
with
> >those operating in much more intense and dangerous political
> >environments, though of course I respect everyone's right to choose
an
> >identify which is pleasing to themselves.
>
> Again with the "dangerous" stuff. We are not asking you to make
molotov
> cocktails. Only to stop preaching on behalf of scum like Clinton,
Kerry and
> Gore.
>
>
> Louis Proyect
> Marxism list: www.marxmail.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Marxism mailing list
> Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism


_______________________________________________
Marxism mailing list
Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism