CEP: Gina and Presumptous Idealism

Rubyg580 at aol.com Rubyg580 at aol.com
Tue Apr 9 19:19:27 MDT 1996

In a message dated 96-04-07 Carlos (CEP) wrote:

>You(Gina) wrote:
>>However, M-L-M is completely partisan, reflecting the interests and
>>the life experience of the PROLETARIAT, which is an international

>    Carlos:
>    No partisan politics today (not just M-L-M) can claim that they
>    "reflect" the "interests and the life experience of the
>    proletariat" unless they can prove that they represent the
>    overwhelming expression of class consciousness and that they are
>    the party for, by and of the class.  M-L-M doesn't even represent
>    the "interests and the life experience of the *vanguard* of the
>    proletariat or of any significant section of it, not even at a
>    national level.
>    When a group of petitbourgeois politicians gather together and
>    decided they do so and embark in a war with another armed
>    apparatuss, they are being objectively anti-Marxists no matter what
>    they claim.
>    Even Lenin, and Trotsky for that matter, will say something
>    pedantic such as their currents represented "the historical
>    interests of the working class".  This is much more accurate
>    and scientific because *does not* claim the representation of
>    *the life experience* and the *interests* as they are today
>    at the actual level of class consciousness, but of the "historical
>    interests" alluding with it to the program.
>    Gina:
>>  This fact may cause it to seem rigid, particularly to people
>>who have lived their whole life in the relative comfort of the petty
>>bourgeoisie in imperialist countries.  The firmness of principle that
>>Maoists exhibit on behalf of the proletariat may well be somewhat
>>disturbing to p.b. intellectuals who rightly see revolution,
>>especially that led by the proletariat, as shaking up their comfortable
>>world, and their comfortable world view.
>    Carlos:
>    Actually, it is a pedantic middle class assertion to define a
>    minuscule group with almost no weight in the proletariat as to
>    be the  reflection of the "interests and life experience of the
>    working class".
>    Rigidity doesn't come, then, from the representation of the
>    proletariat but from the complete lack of understanding of
>    the proletariat and what its interests and life experience are.
>    Terrorism is, in itself, when elevated from a tactic to an
>    strategy, a reflection of a sector of the desperate
>    petitbourgeoisie, pragmatic and anti-scientific, who have lost
>    all working class perspective and the hope to achieve one.  They
>    have no patient to develop the mass movement ... they need action
>    and change now ... therefore the bomb and the gun replace the
>    theory, the program and the mass articulation of that program.
>    This is not Marxism ... it is impotent idealism with a clear class
>    origen: the pragmatist middle class.
>    Carlos

 Well, well, what an erudite conclusion!  Now could Mr. Carlos CEP
please explain to us what is his intimate "understanding of  the proletariat
and what its interests and life experience are."?


     --- from list marxism at lists.village.virginia.edu ---

More information about the Marxism mailing list