[Marxism] Armed struggle and Marxist tactics

Mark Lause MLause at cinci.rr.com
Thu Jun 24 06:35:33 MDT 2004

We'll have to agree to disagree on the issues between the SWP and USec
in the early 1970s.  However, it certainly wasn't as clear cut as has
been presented here.  My take on it was that the former had a formulaic
approach to making a revolution that it advocated in circumstances that
really didn't suit it.  

You can't treat "armed struggle" as a common tool from one situation to
another, from one time to another, etc. For example, armed struggle is
very different in modern times than it was in Trotsky's day...or
earlier.  Blanqui spent decades at war with the system...quite literally
from his perspectives.  I think the ruling class has the kind of
technology and power today that makes it much more dicey. 

The rhetoric of armed struggle may well be a reformist attempt to get
the ruling class to throw money at a problem.  This motivated much of
the saber-rattling off-the-pig language of the Blank Panther Party.
However, even prosperous 20th century societies relatively disinclined
to use brute force as its first resort to repress critics to brutal
repression will do so pretty severely, as the BPP example recalls.

Clearly, it was not so for the Sandinistas.

Mark L.

More information about the Marxism mailing list