hariette spierings hariette at
Wed Apr 3 04:32:58 MST 1996

>On Tue, 2 Apr 1996, Chris Faatz wrote:
>> I say, go for it Louis. If Adolfo really is the mega-theoretical wiz-kid
>> star of this list, then he should have no problem in doing as he urges
>> me to do, and put politics--and a clear class line--in command, and
>> having a go-round with you, rather than one of his tedious DougyDog
>> fests.
>Louis: He doesn't really have a choice. I will deliver my first
>installment this weekend. It will expose the stupidity and bankruptcy of
>Stalin's "third period" during the rise of Hitler. These politics, of
>course, are now being recycled by Adolfo and I can't wait to see him defend
>Stalin's "third period" madness. People will soon realize that Adolfo is
>a braggart and nothing else. His posts are 50% bombast and 50% quotes
>from Lenin. He could do us a big favor and get his sorry ass off this
>list and get involved with building the Lenin archive on the Web. Those
>Lenin quotes would actually be useful there. That project desperately
>needs people who are cut out for stenography.

>From a letter by A. Olaechea commenting one of Hugh Rodwell's posting

Will shall then, perforce, have to take care of Proyect first, since he is
so very eager and worked up into a foaming lather to relive the Stalin debate.

We did not want this war, and we enter into it with regret for the patience
of many people that would have preferred a more actual and alive issue to
debate.  However things can still turn up for the better for this experience
and lead to the opposite results our enemies are seeking.

We will aim to show that Stalin, in EVERY SPECIFIC ONE - not only in those
mentioned by Proyect in his ludicrous challenge - of his international
policies, followed broadly Leninist positions.

We will also aim to demonstrate,  with Marxist science, that, in fact,
Trotsky's alternative policies, as I am sure Proyect will also elaborate (or
even represent) by himself (given that he is the back seat driver on this
occassion), would actually have only served to make difficult matters a lot
worse, if not disastrous for the interests of the proletariat and the
people, for the world revolution.

That such policies as Proyect would have implemented - in the name of
Trotskysm - in all the circunstances he describes  - whichever he chooses -
would in fact have led to defeat for the peoples and to circunstances
facilitating a longer period of Nazi/fascism at the world level.  We will
also show that people like Proyect haven't yet given up on their attempts to
help imperialism bring this very fascism, although today a fascism of a new
type, to bear upon the proletariat and the people for a 1000 years or more.

Then we will come to you, if you don't mind Mr. Rodwell.  You see, with
Master Proyect we will apply Leninism, as we had already done.  We will
apply also Maoism.  But with you, we will have to apply pure and undiluted
primigenial Marxism.  Quite a jump that one my friend.  For the very rose,
eh? Hic salta, and all that?

We will come to that, if you are patient and stick around while we the ugly
and base creatures of intelectual labour raise ourselves to your level and
make you budge.  A bit like an attempt to making you spit the "proletarian
silver spoon", Mr. Rodwell.

I recognise in you the only worthy Marxist theoretician to debate as an
opponent in both lists.  All the others have already shown, either to have
our understanding, or to be our enemies, while you have shown to be both our
enemy and to have a form of our understanding and even our method.

Proyect's case is a political issue, the theoretical issues with him were
already resolved before and now stand clear.  With you, I think the issue is
a properly a philosophical one, and since you won't commit yourself to a
firm criticism on questions of method, but only claim that we have our
theory upside down (assuming yours to have the grasp of the right "end of
the stick"), such philosophical battles can only take place at the end, like
Armaggedon, isn't it Mr. Rodwell.

I think we will get to that, if not here, then in Marxism 3, however I have
the feeling that it will be here, in Marxism 1 that things will have to be
resolved in the end.

Let Master proyect, since he insists, commence and lay his thick witches'
brews of facts and fiction on the table.  We did not want to do this again,
but we are going to have to fight the battles of the 30s and 40s all over
again for the benefit of his bruised ego, a cost we incurred in the last

M3= SYNTHESIS?  What do you think Mr. Rodwell?

Adolfo Olaechea

     --- from list marxism at ---

More information about the Marxism mailing list