List useage

Ron Press anclondon at gn.apc.org
Sun Jan 29 01:36:41 MST 1995


Hi


>Perhaps the problem is that the list is a mixture of two
>currents. There are Marxists within it, but there are also
>post-Marxists. Post-Marxism is widely accepted in the
>academic world, but challenges many of the "foundational"
>ideas of Marxism. Post-Marxism views traditional Marxism and
>especially the Leninist current as reductive and
>antidemocratic. It opposes any political movement which
>tries to explain history or society in terms of the role of
>a specific class or privileged agency. Post-Marxism does
>accept the inspiration deriving from Marx's intellectual
>legacy, especially his early works, but denies the Marxist
>emphasis on the economic substructure. Many post-Marxists
>tend to argue on behalf of radical democracy rather than
>socialist planned economies in the Soviet model.

I fear me there are more than one or  two currents. I sincerely hope so. I feel most strongly that unless the aim is to solve a problem these various streams are no more than erudite debating societies.

I suggest an area for practical study would be South Africa.

There are many very diverse strands involved in the a) avoidance of a new bloodbath, b) the creation of a new better society.

The Government of National Unity, the Reconstruction and Development Program, the Truth Commission, the recent history of the United Democratic Front, the Alliance of the Communist Party, the Trade Unions, the African National Congress. All these have tremendous lessons for the world movement.

Get the African Communist,

SACP
3 Rd Floor
COSATU House
1 Leyds Street
Braamfontein
Johannesburg 2001
South Africa
box 1027 jhb 2000
Tel: 0102711 3393621 x /2
Fax: 339 4244/6880
0102711 8366867 /6425

It will perhaps be a bit difficult but very rewarding. (Forgive me for the plug. But I feel we have something to offer)

I agree that there is nothing wrong with the bais of Marx. Just as there is nothing wrong with the Newtonian view of Gravity. The Einsteinian view revises it but does not throw it away or declare it wrong. It adds to and expands it.

I similar problem is present in the incorporation of Non-Equilibrium Thermodianamics, Fractal theory, strange attractors, and non-linear geometry, emmergence etc into the thinking of not so much of biologists and scientists but sociologists.

I know that the science of society is different from that of physics but I feel the same applies here except in as much as there are those vested interests who would deny Marxism alltogether

Socialism did not fail in the USSR, the CPSU failed socialism.

Why?. It is my beleif that it failed socialism because it was structured incorrectly. The possibility of a Government of National Unity was scuppered by internal and external forces. The forces of reaction were confronted not by greater unity in diversity but by more centralisation especially under Stalin, encouraged and prodded by the growth of Fascism and Imperialism.

This has lessons for us. I feel we must create a unity out of the diversity of ideas appearing in this list.

>Perhaps the problem is that the list is a mixture of two
>currents. There are Marxists within it, but there are also
>post-Marxists.

The problem is not the two currents but the slowness of their interaction. ( I hesitate to say the Dialectic because so many words have become debased).

It is very strange. One throws stones into this pond do the stones landes in the wrong pond or because the battleships floating in it are immune to the actions of stones.

Ron Press


     ------------------



More information about the Marxism mailing list