Chris M. Sciabarra's Tepid Defense of Capitalism
Maoist Internationalist Movement
mim3 at nyxfer.blythe.org
Tue Sep 19 18:39:45 MDT 1995
On Tue, 19 Sep 1995, Jamal Hannah wrote:
> > And as far as capitalists TRYING to gain
> > monopolistic control -- this too, cannot be achieved without some form of
> > political intervention. By the way, the Austrians are as critical of
> > monopoly as they are of "socialism" in that to the extent to which each
MIM replies: Is their being "critical of monopoly" able to prevent
monopoly or is this criticism more like unrequited love--ineffective?
There is a strong streak of idealism in both anarchism and libertarianism.
Here we see a case of someone (Sciabarra) substituting the invisible hand
for God finding it sufficient for those who want results
to wait till the next life.
We agree with Jamal Hannah's criticism of Sciabarra, but would say
much of the criticism applies to anarchism as well. For example,
how can one criticize Gonzalo as "opportunistic" until one has
"a bird in the hand"? What makes one assume the focoist group is better?
Or the IU? Or is it just wishful thinking?
Could Jamal Hannah tell us which of the great anarchist theorists
were really theorists and not social artists? Which ones told us
of realistic strategies and which ones succeeded somewhere? (By
the way there is definitely a place for liberation poetry, music
etc., just not in place of the political-military reasoning
necessary to defeat Hitler for instance.)
We at MIM are willing to jump with the oppressed from horse to
horse midstream. We aren't willing to jump into the stream hoping
a horse will come along and catch us, but this is what anarchists
and Trotskyists typically ask us to do.
Capitalists are strong enough to win one-on-one fights. The oppressed must
unite to win. For this reason, it is important to TAKE SIDES and
criticize Marxism-Leninism-Maoism from within. When we split from the
victorious tradition of the proletariat, we weaken the movement and
make Stalin-like repression more likely as a necessity of history.
The anarchist position has always been to call for the white knight
to rescue it from coercive Marxism-Leninism, as a "third" or
"alternative" course, but the knight never comes. Communist anarchism
takes up firm proletarian goals, but it attaches petty-bourgeois methods
that cannot succeed.
MIM's theory journal MT#8 is dedicated to anarchism and its failures.
As always we invite responses.
Pat for MIM
--- from list marxism at lists.village.virginia.edu ---
More information about the Marxism