Text of Khrushchev's speech??

Macdonald Stainsby mstainsby at SPAMhotmail.com
Thu Aug 5 19:45:18 MDT 1999




>>I will try myself, if that's alright.
>
>  Yes, thanks. The more ideas that come in the stronger the site can be
>built.
>
>
>>In fact it is simple: I don't want to force any sterile
>>sectarianism down anyone's throat- and if they identify as "marxist"
>>that is all I need. I myself have no objection to even De Leon, I
>>just hope the reader doesn't fly off their senses to lock up with
>>the SLP. I digress by saying that all those who identify as Marxist
>>tried (as best or worst that they did) to promote ideas through
>>Marxism. I don't like Kruschchev, but even he deserves to be on this
>>list of Marxists. As a list, not a party, the job is to dissiminate,
>>not decifer.
>
>  Taking the stand that Stalinsim is not Marxist is not "sterile
>sectarianism" so long as Stalinism is not Marxist. This is the issue
>that must be debated.

Debated by whom? The site runners, or those who come across the site?
Seriously- are you telling me that you are afraid that people would all run
around being Joe worshippers if they fell into the wrong category? Maybe
Stalin is a way better writer than I remember!! This is the conclusion you
came to, and yours to hold. But that is now what you force on the surfer- a
"line".

>  A Marxist cannot execute other Marxists. Moreover, a Marxist cannot
>execute members of the working class or people aligned with the
>working class. Doing such a thing is in direct opposition to the name
>Marxist.

This is your opinion, for the most part of which, I agree. However, I think
I can make my standpoint this simple: There is no one on this emailing list
that I agree with one hundred percent. No one on this list would I call
"Non-Marxist", either. There are people reading these words right now (you
know who you are) who have a very different schema towards Stalin than you.
They are Marxists, wouldn't you agree? It is not up to an INFORMATION site
to clarify on behalf of others which leaders are "good" and which "bad".
When you start to teach what is essentially a Trotskyist position (not
limited to) the list IS sectarian, not avoiding it. Yours is a "history" of
Marxism site, and the debate around socialism in one country definitely was
made by two opposed but Marxist camps. If the site is to be non-sectarian,
perhaps a Trotskyism section, a Stalin section, etc... with some kind of
intro. I seriously doubt whether this could be done non-sectarianly,
however. People treat their opinions on the 20's Russia like a first born
child. Depressing.
   As far as "proving" that Stalinism is Marxist sufficiently, No. I'm not
going to play that game. I have my opinions, quite strong, on the subject.
Read my posts and it will come out. I refuse this kind of behaviour in a
public forum, I've already wasted far too much of my life arguing about the
land reforms that took place 50 years before I was born, in a country that
no longer exists. How about a debate on China? I'd be into that.

Macdonald


***************************
***************************
To criticize the people's shortcomings is neccessary, as we have already
said, but in so doing we must truly take the stand of the people and speak
out of whole hearted eagerness to protect and educate them. To treat
comrades like enemies is to go over to the stand of the enemy.

Mao Tse-tung, "Talks at the Yenan forum on literature and art".


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com









More information about the Marxism mailing list