[PEN-L:28265] citation on reforms

[Chris Burford <cburford@xxxxxxxxxx>]

At 20/07/02 13:35 -0400, Louis Proyect wrote:
> Chris Burford wrote:
>
> >  Virtually everyone is in favour of reforms now. The question is how
> > radical are they, and what class interest do they serve. And how will
> > they modify rather than abolish the fundamental contradiction between
> > the accumulation of capital and the limited purchasing power of the masses.
>
> Everybody is in favor of "reforms" except Marxists, at least the real ones.


I am glad that Louis Proyect has responded to Juriaan by giving examples of
reforms which he favours. Because unless this statement is a mere
tautology, by which "real" marxists are defined as opposed to unreal
marxists, or everything hangs on the word "reforms" in inverted commas as
distinct from "reforms" without inverted commas, this statement appears to
be a mere assertion.

It is difficult not to respond to it with a counter assertion, which might
merely obscure what the argument is about, and personalise it.

Lenin wrote in "The Importance of Gold" November 1921,

"Marxism alone precisely and correctly defines the relation between reform
and revolution. Marx was able to see this realtion only from one aspect,
namely in the conditions preceding the first to any extent permanent and
prolonged victory of the proletariat, if only in one countrey. In those
conditions, the basis fo the proper relation was: reform is the by-prdouct
of the revolutionary class struggle of the proletariat............Before
the victory of the proletariat, reforms are a by-product of the
revolutionary class struggle."

I believe I recall Louis Proyect asserting that we would not get very far
by quoting Lenin, but I cannot remember the context. However if he wishes
to assert that real Marxists are not in favour of reforms, he might
strengthen his position by citing a source, otherwise it might just appear
a loaded assertion as to who is a real Marxist and who is an unreal marxist.

Chris Burford