Lenin and internationalism

JEFF SPARROW jeffs at werple.mira.net.au
Wed May 30 01:54:11 MDT 2001

Louis Proyect
"If you had written something like this to start off with, you would have 
not been the target of my sarcasm. In your original post, you came off as 
glib and superficial.

Now you come across simply as sombebody who likes to measure one dead 
revolutionary against another.

Still leaves something to be desired.

What ideas do you have for socialist prospects as the twentieth century 
winds down? This type of discussion would be more fruitful, wouldn't it?"

I come across as glib and superficial? Read some of your own posts. The first thing I send in months to this list is in response to what seems to me to be a quite interesting question from another contributor, and then I get this sneering put down along the lines of what have you done for the revolution lately. No wonder your list is so full of personal bitchiness about what one moderator has done to another.

But more importantly, the implications of the positions you are taking are quite silly. Are you seriously suggesting that there is something wrong in measuring one dead revolutionary against another? 

Marx is dead, Engels is dead, Lenin is dead, Trotsky is dead - in fact just about everyone that people on this list talk about is dead. But it's important to assess the various contributions of these corpses. You can't have any understanding of Marxism in the late twentieth century without, for example, measuring Trotsky against Stalin. 

It is inane to simply say, "Look, those old duffers are dead. Who cares bout the controversies of the past?"

Which is why Lenin's attitudes to the world movement before WWI matter. After all, most of the little groups round the place today base themselves theoretically on what Lenin said and did during that time. If he was wrong, well, it has consequences for socialist prospects today.

     --- from list marxism at lists.village.virginia.edu ---

More information about the Marxism mailing list