Re: [Marxism] Either a socialist revolution or a caricature of revolution

[Walter Lippmann <walterlx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Trotsky was correct when he said that every reformist sounds like a Bolshevik
when defending themselves against critics to their left. Yet Trotsky didn't put
in anywhere NEAR the time attacking the inadequacies of Haile Selassie as a
defender of Ethiopia which people like James Petras, International Viepoint, the
Spartacists, Socialist Action and the rest have put in attacking Evo Morales.

This is distressingly reminiscent of the stuff Joseph Hansen wrote about so well
in defending the SWP's support for the Cuban revolution against those like 
Robertson, Wohlforth and Mage who frothed about the lack of democracy, or 
rather the lack of "workers democracy" in Cuba in the spring of 1961. Hansen
pointed out that this campaign dovetailed a campaign in the imperialist media
about the lack of democracy in Cuba. Theodore Draper, the former Communist
who became a good historian of the CPUSA, wrote a famous anti-Revolutionary
pamphlet called CASTRO'S CUBA: A REVOLUTION BETRAYED? in which he used
Trotsky's title to formulate a polemic against the Cuban Revolution. This strong
historical example, which should be personally reminiscent to at least some of
the older members of this forum, should be kept in mind by everyone, I think.

Cuba does rather well in taking care of its own diplomatic needs, and the modest
efforts of some of us to report on these are but a virtual reflection of what 
Cuba
has accomplished in the real world. Real world. Real countries. Real struggles.
Real victories. Real defeats. Real contradictions. The lack of diplomatic 
skills we
sometimes see on the internet, where vitriolic personal invective at times cuts
across helpful discussion which can clarify disputed issues is of a lower level 
of
importance than Cuba's diplomatic needs, but it has its own real significance.

Cuba itself is a land filled with its own contradictions and problems, even now 
in
the 47th year since the triumph of the revolution. The speech which Fidel gave 
on November 17 began some necessary discussion of these many problems. 
He felt so strongly about this that he even put a question mark over the Cuban
Revolution's continued validity. a theme which more than a few Cuban writers
have taken up in developing and expanding Fidel's comments. For exampleÑ
THE REVOLUTION CAN BE SAVED
http://www.walterlippmann.com/docs326.html

Whatever Victor Tirado might have written fifteen years ago, there is no reason
to develop illlusions in imperialism. The war on and occupation of Iraq, and the
imperialist media and its presstitute´s campaigns against Cuba, Evo Morales
and Fidel Castro demonstrate there´s no basis for softness on imperialism.
It´s unclear why softness on imperialism is being raised in this discussion.
Is someone writing here reflecting softness on imperialism? I haven´t seen it.

There is a pecular phemenenon in certain circles of a fascination with those
who have been leftists in the past and who have repented, now seeking their
approval from the masters of capital. Generally this phenomenon happens to
some as they get older. Remember the old saw about anyone who isn´t a
socialist at twenty has no soul, but anyone who is still a socialist at 40  has 
no
brain? 

Sometimes it seems that this strong fascination with renegacy may have some
other roots. We're all getting somewhat older. I'm getting older each and every
day, though I'm not sure about everyone in this forum. Could it be that this 
very
strident concern for purity, sometimes mislabled *socialist strategy*, has some
similar origin? Are some authors looking in the mirror and worrying about what
has become of their dreams, their youthful hopes and illusions for a quick 
rebuild
of society? There must be a reason for the ferocity of these polemics?

Perhaps it will come out in the wash one of these days.

Meanwhile, the duty of every revolutionary remains still, just as it was forty 
and
a hundred and forty years ago, to make the revolution. At the same time, in the
imperialist countries, an important task (NOT the only one, but still an 
important
one), is to defend each and every stepward of the real struggle. In that sense,
defending Evo Morales against the James Petras´s of the world, and those who
aspire to be like them, are also tasks of timely value, in my personal opinion.

Instead of hailing Evo Morales's victory, and then trying to understand it 
fully,
using all of our critical faculties, some unfortunates have been diverted into a
denunciatory path, guided by "criticism-ism". Such an approach, which says
that if they do not criticize, they have no reason for existence, perhaps is a
way some think they can insulate themselves from change. Sometimes it is
difficult for some people to take "yes" for an answer. That is unfortunate.

To Evo Morales, I admit I do not hesitate to say "yes".


Walter Lippmann
http://www.walterlippmann.com/
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CubaNews/
==================================================

LOUIS PROYECT AFFIRMED:
Che wrote this speech not out of concern for Cuba's diplomatic needs but 
because he wanted to come to the aid of Vietnam. It was titled "Create two,
three… many Vietnams" and delivered to the Tricontinental in 1967.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, and Cuba is the only country that has abolished class rule. The 
question before us is not the diplomatic needs of Cuba but how to end the 
sort of misery in Bolivia that drew Che to this country in the first place 
and that still exists. Che's foquismo was in error, but we still have to 
focus on the question of *socialist strategy*.

>The Soviet Union was an alternative pole of attraction and an alternative
>model for social development, though deformed by bureaucratic degener-
>ation.

I always get the sinking feeling that a lot of Walter is writing is shaped 
by TINA. You have to remember that Victor Tirado wrote an infamous article 
declaring that the era of socialist revolutions had come to an end with the 
collapse of the USSR. Not surprisingly, he wrote  in 1991 that ."..we are 
used to thinking that imperialism only wants to keep us in misery. I 
believe that was true in the past, but it is not the moment we are 
experiencing now."

>Thanks for the 40-year old quotation from Che Guevara. Fidel said very much
>the same thing in the SECOND DECLARATION OF HAVANA. However neither
>he nor the other leaders of the Cuban Revolution say these things today.
>They recognize that there have been a few changes in the last forty years.

So I guess the goal is to say the same things that the Cuban leaders say. 
Who needs a brain when you can serve as a stenographer.





________________________________________________
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