[Marxism] Hopelessly but stubbornly

["Nestor Gorojovsky" <nestorgoro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Respuesta a:"Marxism Digest, Vol 27, Issue 23"
Enviado por:marxism-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Con fecha:8 Jan 2006, a las 6:30

> One of the recurring themes from those that Robert Montgomery has 
> labeled "the nationalist bloc" is that "the traditionalist bloc" 
> forgets that all questions are international questions and that the 
> main enemy is U.S. imperialism and that what the Traditionalists see 
> as a blind huzzahing of revolutionary (progressive?) nationalist 
> figures is sound political recognition that everyone needs to unite 
> behind Chavez, Lula (then, but apparently not now; he is not "turning 
> out" so well) and Morales. The ruling class layers within these 
> countries are seldom, if ever, mentioned.
> 

Hopelessly but stubbornly, I will explain some basic things for the 
nth time.

In acknowledging the primacy of US imperialism not "in the world" 
but, more modestly, in South America and specifically in Bolivia or 
Venezuela, what one is doing is to acknowledge that US imperialists 
and their immediate associates, employees and partners, are the _main 
and trunk section of the ruling classes LOCALLY_.

Yes, locally.

US imperialism does not stop at the US border.  It is conceived in 
order to cross over that border.  Moreover:  it is not even 
"coinceived in order to", it is simply the inevitable effect of 
capitalist development in a metropolitan economy.  So that what 
happens is that capitalists at the core not only _insert_ themselves 
within the colonial or semicolonial country but they _become the core 
of the ruling classes there_.  

When the American embassy is stronger than your own state, what you 
have is an American embassy which acts on behalf not only of American 
citizens, which is reasonable enough, but also on behalf of the core 
of your own _ruling classes_!

In the semicolonial periphery, thus, imperialism operates like a 
virus:  it is not a "foreign" abstraction, it becomes part and parcel 
of the economy, society and culture of the colonial or semicolonial 
society.

In addressing the struggle against imperialism  you are addressing 
the main struggle against the _local_ ruling class(es).  When I say 
"imperialism" I mean "US, EU or whatever" -this goes for those so 
startled at our concentration on US imperialism, lest anyone believe 
this concentration forgets Mssrs. Ericsson, Mitsubishi and similars 
_are_ imperialist bourgeois too.  And for those who I will always 
label anti-Marxist, those who are so rabidly anti-bourgeois that they 
claim that there can be a Brazilian, Indonesian, Indian, Venezuelan, 
Argentinean, etc. "imperialism".

The fact is that one of the best definitions of a semicolony is that 
of a social formation where national politics is international, where 
the local ruling classes are linked by the core to an alien power 
with goals that differ widely from those of the subject population.

What with the other fractions of the bourgeoisie, then?  Are we not 
cheerleading the roguish and most effective (!!!!!) "national 
bourgeoisies" instead of fighting them?  It is simply outrageous to 
compare those "bourgeoisies" with the imperialist Leviathan, and 
imperialist ideology is already expressing itself in this comparison. 
 But I understand that in the best mood what these cdes. fear is that 
the ruling classes will take the helm and bring the whole thing to a 
disaster _because they are already allied with the core of the ruling 
class_

Well, this is where Permanent Revolution comes to play.  Within the 
general struggle against imperialism, other fractions than workers 
and peasants can join the general march in the struggle against the 
core of the ruling classes, or not.  It is up to them.  What we 
serious revolutionary Marxists do in the semicolonies is to join the 
general movement and try to demonstrate, at every and each crucial 
situation, that without socialism the revolution is doomed, and 
propose ourselves as the leadership.

If the river flows upwards, flow upwards with the river and try to 
show that there is a better way to reach the ocean.  If it flows 
downwards, try to be the organizing core of the march.  This is what 
one knows as _concrete class struggle within the national front_.

If you step out of the river and -lying safely on the banks- you 
lambast the mass because they follow the "national bourgeoisie", you 
are condemning yourself to nothingness, and, most seriously, you are  
working on behalf of the main fraction of the ruling classes. 
Particularly of the "national bourgeoisie" you vocally hate so much, 
because they will use your stupidity to keep the masses alienated 
from socialism, and also -and most particularly- of the fraction that 
wants the whole national movement to become hot steam on a sterile 
desert of empty sloganeering:  imperialists and their local 
employees.

Este correo lo ha enviado
Néstor Miguel Gorojovsky
nestorgoro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[No necesariamente es su autor]
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 
"La patria tiene que ser la dignidad arriba y el regocijo abajo".
Aparicio Saravia
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 



________________________________________________
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