Marxism
mailing list archive
[ Other Periods
| Other mailing lists
| Search
]
Date:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Thread:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Index:
[ Author
| Date
| Thread
]
Re: [Marxism] Class, Party, and Organization
Joaquin Bustelo wrote:
"This was not Lenin's approach -- "engage and then we'll see." When
everyone was talking about the need to create a real party organization
for the class-political movement that was emerging in Russia around
1900, it was Lenin who sat down to work out a detailed plan of how you
could organize a workers party under conditions of tsarist repression."
And then he wrote:
"That is radically and fundamentally false. If you build it, the masses
will not come. The masses will throw up completely unexpected vehicles
and forms as they go into motion. The job of Marxists is NOT to explain
which are the wrong forms and provide the right ones."
I think there is an implicit contradiction between these two statements.
The first point is put incorrectly: Lenin's approach was not as blunt as
"engage and then we'll see" but that was certainly an important part of
it. This is because Lenin recognised, as events unfolded, the validity
of the second point Joaquin makes. Obviously we shouldn't be blind to
taking advantage of every turn the struggle takes and every new
invention of the workers in struggle. Nor should we ignore the theory of
examining the overall tasks for the working class of our given
nation-state and theorising the best way to move forward either. In
other words, you can't guarantee you will unite [with] the masses just
by building an organisation, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't build
an organisation! It just means you have to be flexible.
I think there's a danger for a small group of socialists to get stuck on
the basic accumulation of cadre, and the ABC-of-Marxism politics
necessary to train new socialist activists, and testing out that
training and ideas, without turning their new activists outward beyond
history and historically generated theory such as the rather
metaphysical theory of party-building. On the other hand, those outside
a group can easily ignore that bread-and-butter educational work and get
carried away with looking at the big picture, or at least with trying to
see it. You can't do one without the other else you drift into abstraction.
Ben Courtice
________________________________________________
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
- Thread context:
- Re: [Marxism] Class, Party, and Organization, (continued)
- Re: [Marxism] Class, Party, and Organization,
Greg McDonald Fri 28 Dec 2007, 02:58 GMT
- Re: [Marxism] Class, Party, and Organization,
mlause Fri 28 Dec 2007, 21:40 GMT
- Re: [Marxism] Class, Party, and Organization,
Ratbag Radio Sat 29 Dec 2007, 07:04 GMT
- Re: [Marxism] Class, Party, and Organization,
Ben Courtice Sun 30 Dec 2007, 01:36 GMT
- [Marxism] Ted Hondrich-Colin McGinn feud,
Louis Proyect Wed 26 Dec 2007, 21:49 GMT
- [Marxism] Clarification from Ed Lewis,
Louis Proyect Wed 26 Dec 2007, 21:04 GMT
- [Marxism] Alexander Cockburn speaks at a Spiked forum,
Louis Proyect Wed 26 Dec 2007, 20:42 GMT
[ Other Periods
| Other mailing lists
| Search
]