Re: [Marxism] Class structure and class politics

["Bob Wood" <bobwood1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Juriaan, I fear you have accessed the wrong Workers Action site. Try the
following.
http://www.workersaction.org.uk/
Bob Wood

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jurriaan Bendien" <andromeda246@xxxxxxxxx>
To: "Marxmail List" <marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, October 30, 2004 5:15 PM
Subject: [Marxism] Class structure and class politics


> This analysis is a kinda interesting summary of some academic research,
but
> it's not something that can really provide much political guidance for
> socialists beyond saying that there is a working class, and that it's the
> revolutionary subject. For which you didn't really need any academic
> analysis anyway.
>
> There's very little specific discussion on the development of social
classes
> in relation to the forms of capital and sectors of economic activity. It
> seems like the author doesn't really understand the point of class
analysis
> or what it means.
>
> At the Worker's Action site, we read "Today the United Secretariat of the
> Fourth International (USEC), because of its phony claim to Trotskyism even
> while it has collapsed into reformism, is the main ideological obstacle to
> overcoming the crisis of leadership."
>
> With such a sectarian, deformed vision of politics, I doubt whether any
> substantial political progress can be made beyond the constant testifying
> and witnessing of revolutionism. Moreover, Workers' Action commits itself
to
> "defending deformed workers' states", as if that isn't reformism. Are
there
> any "deformed workers' states" left, by the way? Moldavia maybe? Cuba?
>
> Imagine going to Cuba, and saying "I will defend your deformed workers'
> state". You got to be joking. Most likely, you'd end up in a deformed
state
> yourself, as somebody rearranges your face.
>
> Workers' Action says it "stands by the programmatic heritage of the Fourth
> International, which was the political continuation of Bolshevik-Leninism,
> before it degenerated into centrism in the Forties." In other words, they
> have a totally idealist concept of what a political programme is, and how
it
> is formed.
>
> In their deformed view, the true revolutionary programme was shelved in
the
> 1940s (why not the 1930s? or the 1920s?) and they think they can now lift
it
> from the shelf, dust it off, and foist it onto the masses. This is
> ridiculous, these people might as well pursue an entryist tactic into the
> Tory party, where they could discuss the sad loss of traditional values in
a
> salon over a cup of Earl Grey tea - or join the recycling lobby of the
Green
> Party. Or, enroll for a course in genealogy with the Mormon Church, where
> they'd be more likely to find some likeminded spirits.
>
> Jurriaan
>
>
>
>
>



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