history and class struggle

Gorojovsky Gorojovsky at SPAMarnet.com.ar
Mon Feb 19 21:06:37 MST 2001


En relación a Re: history and class struggle,
el 19 Feb 01, a las 17:41, Dennis R Redmond dijo:

>
> There's been nothing more fatal to the Left than assuming that
> socialism is identical to some existing state apparatus.

Agreed.

> The Soviet Union
> had some socialist features, some capitalist ones, and some feudal ones;
> class struggle continued to go on beneath the veneer of one-party rule.

Also agreed.

> Same is true for the US -- public education, environmental laws, and a
> progressive tax code are very socialist things, which the ruling class
> would like to destroy.

I think you are considering "socialist" things that in fact are not such, but
with the kernel of the above, also: agreed.

However, nothing of what I agree with has anything to do with

> Adorno's point is that the US and USSR were two
> sides of the same world-system, and that nowhere did a realm of true human
> freedom exist.

On this I can't but call back old Hegel, and remind his idea that the only kind
of freedom one can ever have (even under socialism, in a sense) is the clear
consciousness of duty. Adorno's "freedom" was abstract, Enlightenment, freedom.
This does not imply that I consider the fSU as a "free" place. But wherever
there is class struggle there is a field where you can expand your personality
and seek to enlarge that field. In my book, this is freedom, true freedom.

> For all Adorno's faults and limitations, this insight alone
> makes him one of the great thinkers of the 20th century -- the insight
> that we've got to think, act and organize *globally* from now on.

But was it _his_ insight? Does this really put him in a class apart from his
predecessors, Dennis?


Néstor Miguel Gorojovsky
gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar





More information about the Marxism mailing list