Re: [Marxism] The two souls of socialism

["rrubinelli" <rrubinelli@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Having alienated one side of this discussion, Ian Pace, I thought the
least I could do is alienate the other side.

It's been awhile since I've read S&R, but I can't recall Lenin saying
anything like that- like the workers aren't equipped to take power until
after the revolution.  I've looked through the old copy I have, briefly,
and don't see it, but I do see Lenin almost "carried away" with exactly
the opposite-- with the  notions that within 24 hours of taking over the
state and economic machinery, the workers will be able to institute a
real democracy,  capable of real equality, with real participation.  See
Chapter V parts 2,3,4.

Maybe I've forgotten and overlooked Lenin saying "after."  But in any
case, Lenin clearly is talking not about after but about prerequisites
and immediacy, which is partly why I find the term "oligarchy" so
mistaken.

rr

----- Original Message -----
From: <Jscotlive@xxxxxxx>
To: <marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > I think Lenin had it right when he talked in State And  Revolution
about the
> necessity of raising the political and cultural level  of the workers
AFTER
> the revolution to the point where they are  equipped to take power.
>
> 'Act first, then we'll see.'
>


________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism