Blaming a dead man, your parents and the labor aristocracy

Bryan A. Alexander bnalexan at
Fri Oct 13 21:11:53 MDT 1995

Again, this is a Marxist list.  And I'm not interested in getting into a
lengthy debate about anarchism here, because we have more focused
questions to deal with.  But if you insist:
	The thousands of years old bit refers to several things.
	1. Neolithic micropolitics, which many consider to be humane.
	2. For me, the Taoist Yellow Turbans revolt, which was
underclass-generated and which brought down a dynasty.

	As for Spain: the struggle was complex.  And the CP there managed
very well to keep good info about the anarchists out of the hands of the
citizens they ruled.  so perhaps anarchists weren't as good as the CP at
early 20th-century propaganda; we need to talk about this as a failing,
if we consider it so.

Bryan Alexander
Department of English
University of Michigan

On Thu, 12 Oct 1995, Maoist Internationalist Movement wrote:

> On Wed, 11 Oct 1995, Bryan A. Alexander wrote:
> > Sigh.  Once again a flung bash at the anarchsists.
> > 	And a weird harmony between Louis and MIM, both reproaching
> > anarchism for its real results.
> > 	I'll point to Spain for now - you all know when.  The anarchists
> > as a popular movement abolished state power, trashed elites, improved
> > life, successfully lived in anarchist-modeled society, and defended
> > themselves for years despite comparative originary weakness.  Then again,
> > having the Stalinists help destroy them might have played a role?
> Pat for MIM replies: Opposing sectarianism means upholding truth
> when it is held in the hands of other individuals and
> organizations. Proyect said the right thing about anarchism.

> Even if we take the anarchists at face-value, and grant them 100%
> of their story on evil Stalin in Moscow crushing Spain,
> what does their story amount to? How is it that the proletariat
> let Stalin crush them in every country this century? (Same
> question to like-minded Trotskyists who blame Stalin for their
> own failure to mobilize the proletariat and other laboring masses.)
> If Trotskyism or anarchism are proletarian ideologies, they should be
> able to mobilize the masses to stop evil Stalin. In fact, Trotskyism
> and anarchism are just idealisms, not proletarian ideologies,
> so they fail.

	Do you accept the possibility of deluded proletarian behavior
parallel but not identical to false consciousness?

> Actually, anarchism is older than Marxism, thousands of years old
> in China if we believe some scholars. What is there to show for it?
> How can Stalin be blamed for the failure of an ideology that pre-dates
> Stalin? Anarchism was a failure before Stalin and it continues to be one
> after him as well. We need not get into much historical detail to see
> that anarchism is detached from historical reality, unscientific
> and not capable of mobilizing the proletariat.
see above.

     --- from list marxism at ---


More information about the Marxism mailing list