[PEN-L:32452] Re: Re: Re: Re: Rx6: Joanne- re 2WW - I almost forgot

[Michael Perelman <michael@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

sure, you can have an honorary degree from me.

On Thu, Nov 21, 2002 at 08:45:36PM -0500, Waistline2@xxxxxxx wrote:
> In a message dated 11/20/02 5:11:02 PM Pacific Standard Time,
> michael@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx writes:
>
> > What is this strange fascination with Stalin?
> > --
> > Michael Perelman
> > Economics Department
> > California State University
> > Chico, CA 95929
> >
> > Tel. 530-898-5321
> > E-Mail michael@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> >
>
>
>
> To a not small degree it is I that periodically challenge those who raise the
> issue of the Stalin period. My reasoning is not to bore the readers but to
> examine the economic framework under which Soviet socialism operated and its
> law of value or the value form.
>
> Then the is the matter of the codification of materialist dialectics and how
> this conception of process was articulated by a previous generation of
> Marxist in power. It is true that I am fascinated with the Stalin period but
> have never had a desire to study his personal life.
>
> Part of my personal intellectual growth was in connection with large scale
> industrial production during that era of American history when the auto
> industry was still the classical arena of technological advance. On the level
> of theory, my framework of Marxism expresses having lived a 30 year period of
> a massive change in the organic composition of capital - the increasing use
> of advancing robotics as a machine operator, assembler and union rep.
>
> The frustration was witnessing this change and not being able to unravel its
> internal logic for the better part of twenty years. This led to studying some
> writings on tools development and usage within Soviet society and intensive
> and extensive evolution of machinery. It was exceptionally fascinating. The
> impulse to revolutionize industrial production under capital is driven by
> competition in the marketplace and this revolutionizing takes place very
> different under Soviet socialism.
>
> I always understood that robotics replaced human being and had read the
> better part of Stalin's 13 volumes at an early age. Most of his writings have
> to do with industrialization of the country as opposed to political struggle,
> but most folks don't know that.
>
> This question of the Soviet Union and Stalin has occupied a portion of my
> daily thinking for 31 years. Not just the internal party struggle, which was
> ultra complex. It is quite easy to understand a physical reaction resulting
> from a physical attack. This same "action" and "reaction" becomes much more
> complex in the social arena when a particular political policy or act may not
> have any direct result until many years later.
>
> Now it is true that I am a Stalin man in the same way that a person might be
> a Thomas Jefferson kind of democrat, which does not mean they support
> implementing slavery. The point is that I began to grasp what was being
> described by the Marxist in power once I made a leap outside of all the
> ideological categories.
>
> The Marxist in the Soviet Union were not communist in the sense of the logic
> of economic development. They were ideological communist based on reading
> books and a political desire. Actually, the previous generation of Marxist in
> America were not communist or even revolutionary except in the purely
> ideological sense. One can only be revolutionary when conditions have ripened
> for revolution. Historically, the previous generations could only be
> industrial reformers because of the time framework and evolutionary
> development in the material power of the productive forces. Joining a
> political group or espousing a particular doctrine does not make
> revolutionaries. Fighting the good fight does not make one revolutionary or
> progressive today either, and this includes me first and foremost.
>
> Sir, the fascination is the unfolding of the value form and defining what is
> meant by the revolution in the material power of the productive forces.
> Forget Stalin and call it the Stalin - stallin, Period of time. The "stall"
> is the recognition that "something is rotten in Rome," and the leap is not
> possible based on electromechanical means of production.
>
> Hey, the American peoples are very far advanced from the "stallin period" of
> time.
>
> The communist class has arisen but ideology confuses matters. Here is an
> example. Comrade Stalin said the American workers could best gauge the
> advance of Soviet society.
>
> Check this out for a minute: I am not "the American worker" but rather a
> black worker that is in  a "revolutionary position" and all such other crap.
>
> The "stallin (Stalin) period is fascinating because if you check it out it's
> like the catch 22 proposition.
>
> Mr. Michael Perelman, my commitment is to be interesting and thought
> provoking. And to remain several steps ahead of the ideologues.
>
> Can I get an honorary degree in self study for unraveling the value form? I
> want this for me and hard thinking.

--
Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California State University
Chico, CA 95929

Tel. 530-898-5321
E-Mail michael@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx