anclondon at gn.apc.org
Sat Mar 25 12:01:18 MST 1995
I find the following in the list.
>>>>>>>> Someone--Mostern, I think--reminded us that we cannot
guarantee the outcome of a revolution. It unleashes forces which
no group can control. Given that revolutions take place under
situations of disruption and conflict, horrific outcomes are
always possible. I think Mostern (if it was he) went to far when
he said he could not see the difference between Stalinism and
our current situation (we are having this discussion, after all,
and do not anticipate the secrete police coming for us as an
immediate consequence). But I agree with him if what he meant
was that the current and projected situatiuon is terrible enough
to make the risks of revolutionary action worthwhile, if we can
do it. Luxemburg posed us with the choice of socialism or
barbarism. Well, Stalinism shows you might get both. But if do
not get socialism, we will certainly get (more) barbarism. So
revolution is a Pascal's wager--I think. I haven't constructed
the matrix. Any, bad as it might be, it's our best bet. Which
doesn't necessarily say much for our chances. <<<<<<<<<<<<<
I will once again face the danger of being tedious, or perhaps
The above passage reflects in a quite concise manner the ideas
of chaos theory.
A rigid complex system fails to satisfy the demands for its self
preservation. It suffers from internal and external pressures
which leads to the breakdown of its organisation. The system
boarders on chaos. It has a choice relapse into complete chaos
and selfdestruct or a new system emerges from the borderline and
reestablishes a system which can survive.
If the new system is inflexible and again unable to survive the
pressures it too relapses into chaos. And the process repeats.
The arrow of time implies that the first system is replaced by a
second and subsequently a third.
However the ideas of non-linear processes and strange Attractors
allows for the possibility that the first system is followed by
the second but theat the third system is a variant of the first.
For first read Capitalism, the second socialism, the third
I do not deny that things are much more complex. But I submit
that the above scenario is not only consistent with marxism (
small m) but an extension of marxism.
A voice on the outside lookin in???
--- from list marxism at lists.village.virginia.edu ---
More information about the Marxism