Ceding ground to capitalist ideologues

Néstor Miguel Gorojovsky gorojovsky at SPAMinea.com.ar
Thu Dec 16 17:38:13 MST 1999





Hah, at last I got Mark attack me and throw missiles at me! I
suppose this is a truly iniciatic ritual I had to pass. Now, I
feel I am a true revolutionary!

I do not expect to convince you on line, Mark, but since I am
certain that your actions bump against your sayings, I am not
quite worried about that. 'Old Bolsheviks' can be counted on,
even when from time to time they become scholastic. But I suppose
this is a useful debate because it contains some important issues
on the meaning of political struggle during the times when the
storm must be set on and during the times when the storm begins
to gather. I believe that this is where we differ: this is, at
least in Argentina, the current situation, and perhaps the same
may be said of the international (mezhdunarodnoye, Mark?)
scenario.

Now, let us see more seriously what is Mark telling us here (I
say 'us' because he slumps me together with 'Hoov' and Yoshie,
which I hope will not be too uncomfortable for my dungeon
comradess, but now I will go ahead on my own behalf). D'Artagnan,
who has defied three men of Cardinal Richelieu, writes:

: ... because trying to force October into existence
:(which is PRECISELY what Lenin tried to do with every breath he
took during his
:whole career, so it is his example I'd like to follow, not yours
or Yoshie's) is
:JUST what we SHOULD INDEED be doing. Otherwise October itself
will never happen
:and WOULD NEVER have happened...


It is funny to note that I am also trying ot force October into
existence, Mark, and that Lenin tried to force it by many
different ways (which is ACTUALLY why it happened). If you are to
follow his example, then you will have to side with me.  Lenin
wasn't ALWAYS caustic and hard when debating. He was a cunning
and dialectic politician, and he knew that there is a time for
making friends with the bores (but putting it very clear that
they are bores) and there is a time for swords, guns and battles.
Of course, October would never have happened if, as you point out
below, Lenin had not turned the Bolshevik party upside down in
April, if Lenin had not shown his party comrades their own
blindness, if Lenin had not thrown to the sea the traditional
theses of the B. Party and, espousing the predictions of
L.D.Trotsky in '1905' (hah, let us see how does good old Mark
react at this), forced it to struggle for power and socialism in
backward and sad Russia. But this will did not always take this
shape.

To begin with, if the April theses were such a stir, it is not
because Lenin's comrades were below his intelligence, prevision
and revolutionary elan (which certainly was not true in all
cases), but also because during the long preparatory years Lenin
accepted the fact that even his, the most revolutionary party in
Russia, had to act as an integral part of the Russian political
scene. Thus, the general ideas that had taken root in Russia
during the early years of this century had to a certain extent
moulded part of the ideas of his party comrades. He could not be
unaware of this, but he did not wage a Torquemadesque war on
them. Time was not ripe.

When it was ripe, that is in April 1917, he urged the
transformation, and timely he did. Timely in two senses: (a) in
the sense that he had foreseen that if the B. P. did not take the
new road, the perspective of revolution would faint -but, during
the days of July, he exerted all his power of persuasion, (not of
invective) in order to have his comrades stop the all-too-early
revolutionary  attempt of the masses at Leningrad- but also in
the sense that (b) time was now ripe for a clear-cut division
with the elements who had gathered around his flags. The April
Theses are the "Hic Rhodos, hic salta!' of the Russian
Revolution, and were set off, just as the interjection of the
Plautine masterpiece, at the very moment they had to be, not a
minute before, not a minute later.

Yes, otherwise October would have never happened, because there
would have not existed a Party that could be reconducted at the
moment of trial. I do not know if you can boast of such a party
in England, Mark. I cannot boast of such a party here, though
during 1999 we in the Partido de la Izquierda Nacional have began
to grow and expand our influence for the first time in many
years.

:
:What do you think the April Theses was about?
:Why did the Nestor's and "Hoovs" and Yoshie's assembled in the
Kshesinskaya palace
:in the spring of 1917, to hear Lenin's words on his triumphant
return from exile,
:conclude that the great man was, as Kollontai said, 'raving
mad'?


Ah, Mark, you are  wrong. In my former Russian avatar (and
Gorojovsky, which is pronounced Gorokhovskiy in English, is a
better credential for Russian avatars than Jones!) I was a member
of the _mezhraiontsii_ who gladly followed Lev Davidovitch into
the Bolshevik Party, because we wanted to launch the Russian
Revolution towards socialism as soon as possible, because after
the April Theses we found Lenin was another one of us! (Gulp, let
us see what will this produce in you!)

So that I am by no means described by your below, which however
_does_ describe some very worthy members of the Bolshevik Party,
some of which felt a certain uneasiness at their beloved Lenin
saying things that we had been saying and that they had been
opposing.

:
:Because while they/you were all warbling and wittering in the
hedgerows
:about social insurance reforms and the latest 'peace'
:ploy from Paris, and the latest negotiations with the Duma,
:Lenin announced the impossible, mad dream of World Revolution
and
:the instantaneous transition to socialism... forgotten our
history, have we, at
:the turn of this bloody century?

The following, with all its nerve, its rapturous English (this is
serious: you are a master of your language, Mark!), is therefore
wrong so far as I am concerned:

: Deliberate amnesia, my dear Nestor, my dear
:Yoshie, is what you've got, because I am making you feel
uncomfortable and the
:very idea of revolution makes makes you feel uncomfortable, even
my use of the
:word 'revolution' makes you squirm uneasily on your bottoms and
glance over your
:shoulder to see whether anyone is laughing....


Look, Mark, you will still have my respect no matter what you do
in order to lose it, so that stop it with this verse above. Keep
it for our enemies. You are not making me uncomfortable. I may,
if you want, explain you what a revolution is in my own view. I
have been a witness and an actor in a long revolutionary wave of
my own people, and I am proud of it and seldom can sleep well
since we were defeated (this is absolutely true). The only thing
that makes me uncomfortable in your posting is to see you
behaving so childishly. Shame, for a seasoned Bolshevik.

:
:I am going to show you why revolutions not only can happen in
the metropoles but
:WILL  happen in the metropoles and I promise to do it before
"Hoov's" next coffee
:table book about cinema comes out.


Dear Mark, I am absolutely certain that the above is true. And I
just hope you will do it at last, and help us here, where wind is
so chilly even in this approaching summer. We need you to revolt,
we need it. But of course we shall not wait for you. In the
meantime, please feel relieved of your demonstrations. I would
not be your friend and comrade if you did not believe that
revolutions can happen in your own home country.
:
:Take up the pen, take up the gun, make revolution. Let the
academic scribblers
:chatter and the freudians analyse their assholes and the
identity freaks work out
:whether they have one. And leave we revolutionaries in peace,
stop carping and
:sniding from your miserable sidelines, and let us get on with
the revolution.


No, Mark, you are wrong again. When Lenin attacked
Shultze-Gävernitz (and this to give an example everyone here may
remember) he did it in order to expose him to the light of
Marxism and Revolution, not only in order to strengthen his own
comrades, but also to gain new people to his struggle. And do you
think we are in a different situation on the e-mail lists? We are
not. We are debating, and we are also calling others to join us.
We need others to join us, and we must cast a net with broad
netting (so little fish will go out) but with the largest
diameter we can think of.

THIS is principled, Bolshevik, action, too. Once in power, you
can be sure that the doors to the party will close so tightly
that not even a breath will traverse them if we don't feel them
worthy.

This is why I am broad and careful while you, wrongly IMHO, claim

:
:THAT'S why I am rebarbative.


Again. Well, I will have to admit it: neither the Collins, nor
the Cuyás, nor the Webster's Collegiate include this
'rebarbative', which sounds so beautifully Latin to my ear.
Please explain.

Nestor.










More information about the Marxism mailing list