Louis N Proyect lnp3 at
Tue Apr 23 05:49:05 MDT 1996

On Mon, 22 Apr 1996, James Miller wrote:

>    When Marxists talk about "bourgeois revolutions" today, they don't
> mean revolutions that are supported by the bourgeoisie; rather they
> refer to revolutions which accomplish the historic tasks associated
> with the needs of capitalist development. These include national
> unification and sovereignty, political democracy under a modern
> constitution, the abolition of various elements of feudalism and
> slavery which persist.

Louis: No class analysis here at all. Once upon a time when the SWP put
Trotsky on a pedestal rather than Lenin, they could muster a class
analysis. All we have here is a description of the *tasks* of the
bourgeois-democratic revolution and not a whisper of the class forces
driving it in Nicaragua, Iran or South Africa.

> I don't think anything can be done to salvage the FSLN (perhaps we
> should say the "former FSLN"). But one of the most important sources
> for the revitalization of the revolutionary process in Latin America is
> the Cuban revolution. Cuba still stands as a beacon for socialism.

Louis: Who are you to sit in judgement on the FSLN? They were driven from
power by the most powerful capitalist nation in history with the
collaboration of a USSR in transition to capitalism. That's something the
SWP will never have to worry about: being driven from power. The SWP
shrank from over 2000 members in the mid 1970s to a husk of an
organization (under 500?) all on its own. The implication in Miller's
post is that the real communists are the Cuban Communist Party and the
SWP. Isn't that so, comrade Miller?

     --- from list marxism at ---

More information about the Marxism mailing list