david.welch at SPAMst-edmund-hall.oxford.ac.uk
Mon Aug 9 07:47:07 MDT 1999
Louis Proyect writes:
> Stalinism means anti-debate. Stalin is the most powerful symbol of
> resistance to open debate in the history of Marxism. On the other hand,
> Marx, Engels and Lenin looked forward to debate. Their collected works for
> the most part are a record of debate with anarchists, Mensheviks, etc.
> After Stalin exiled or killed his oppostion in the USSR, debate came to an
> end which was his intention.
I find the myth of a convivial Lenin (or Marx) and a nasty Stalin rather unlikely,
debate may be useful at a certain state of the development of the party but the aim of
Lenin (and Stalin) was to create a fighting organisation. One wonders what Lenin was
thinking when he ordered an attack on the anarchists at Kronstadt instead of a
friendly chat. It is of course clear that there was plenty of debate and criticism
within Soviet society during Stalin's time,
though within limits.
> Supporting one of the two main bourgeois parties in Colombia is
> class-collaboration. If Leninism is about anything, it is about class
If Leninism is about anything then it should be about avoiding this sort of
silly ultra-leftism. The revolution cannot be successfully completed, particularly in
a colonial or semi-colonial country, unless the proletariat wins
allies among as many classes as possible. What we might well consider the ultimate
example of Leninism in action, the October revolution, involved the alliance of two
classes, the workers and peasants.
More information about the Marxism