The Mother of all Questions

Lueko Willms Lueko.Willms at t-online.de
Sun Sep 28 01:56:10 MDT 2003


in reply to: 
# Subject: Let us not get astray, please
# From: "Nestor Gorojovsky" <nestorgoro at fibertel.com.ar>
# Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 01:44:25 -0300
# http://www.columbia.edu/~lnp3/msg37291.html

> I am not placing "blames" on anyone. I am just trying to debate, 
> together with all the cdes., up to which point the conservatism of 
> the metropolitan working classes is a form of "false consciousness" 
> or is simply the reflection of their privileged situation as regards 
> the mass of the population on Planet Earth.

   Yeah, it is a false consciousness borne out of that priviledged
situation. Do we agree on that? 

   That is a basic fact of the world situation, so basic that I
rarely mention it. 

   The point I want to drive home is that the October revolution
opened an era of proletarian revolutions, and there is neither a
reason for fatalism, nor a possibility for voluntarism. 

   Defeat or victory are not inevitable, but they also cannot be
forced when the objective conditions are not ripe for it, and one of
the consciousness and readyness for action of millions of people can
be part of those objective factors. 

   It is also not inevitable that the weight of the "Labor
aristocracy" prevents the working people of the imperialist countries
from acquiring the consciousness of their real interests which do not
coincide with those of their imperialist masters, on the contrary. Do
we agree on that, Nestor? 

   And lets bear in mind that when discussing the history of
revolutionary victories and defeats of the 20th century, we are
discussing history; the events have passed, the decisions had been
taken, and we can't turn back the history and opt for a different
course back in 1933, e.g. 

   But it also helps to emphasize the fact that the crisis of
humanity boils down to the crisis of the proletarian leadership, when
we review that history and ascertain that it was not inevitable that
the communist leadership in the USSR was replaced and exterminated by
a social layer which preferred to find a peace with imperialism
rather than extending the revolution, that the devastating defeat of
the German working class in 1933 was not inevitable, neither the
defeat of the Spanish brothers several years later, which means that
the World War II was not inevitable and so on and so on. Its history,
but we can draw lessons from it. 

  Nestor writes: 

> In order to understand what happened in the East, it is essential to 
> keep always in mind that the lever was in the West, not in the East. 
> That lever failed to move. 

  Sure, the weight of the world situation was the decisive factor.
But your statement would mean that the defeat of the communists by
Stalin was inevitable, and that the revolutionists in the Soviet
Union didn't have a chance to defend October. Should they have given
up right in 1923? No, not at all. And from what you say flows
logically that a very important part to fight back against the
conservatizing effects of the missing revolutions in the West was to
help the revolutionary leaderships of other countries to advace, and
this, too, was a struggle against the conservative layer within the
Soviet Union who worked for the opposite, up to the point of
murdering revolutionists in the Spanish Civil war and ordering the
Communist parties all over the world to give up the colonial
revolution in order to save the "unity of the democracies". Argentina
is a telling example, isn't it? 

   It is all intertwined, there is no safe boundary for the class
struggle. 


Yours, 
Lüko Willms 
Frankfurt/Main 
Alemania 



~~~~~~~
PLEASE clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.



More information about the Marxism mailing list