[Marxism] Re:Confusion about Maoism
Waistline2 at aol.com
Waistline2 at aol.com
Tue May 4 02:41:03 MDT 2004
In a message dated 5/3/2004 9:12:21 PM Central Standard Time,
DLVinvest at cs.com writes:
maybe you shouldn't wait: while there is much to ponder in Max Elbaum's
post-mortem of the 70s "new Communist movement" (I had the chance of talking
with him at some length on this recently), the task of "overthrowing our own
bourgeois property form" might depend on developing a serious answer (one
capable of persuading workers and others to become revolutionaries) to the
questions: what went wrong in USSR? Why and how was capitalism restored? What are the
"errors" or "mistakes" or problems that revolutionaries there were not able to
overcome, and which allowed for restoration of capitalism? is China
"socialist" or "capitalist"?
Actually, such a discussion is currently under way on Pen-L and in the past I
have written much on this matter. China has bourgeois property relations.
This is self evident to anyone that understands anything about Capital. Look at
how its reproduction cycles are driven. Go to Wal Mart or any dollar store and
look at where the products come from. There are two distinct developmental
trends in China. One is industrialization and post industrial modernization.
Overthrowing our own bourgeoisie is not dependent upon economic analysis of
Max Elbaum "Revolution in The Air" describes us - CL/CLP, pretty accurate. We
were neither "New Communists," "Trotskyites," "The Stalinist Group," or the
Stick around. Discussions run in cycles on Marxmail. Sooner or later we will
get back to talking about why the Soviet Union was socialists, its cycles of
reproduction, the role of heavy and light industry, the problems of
agriculture, the question of the bureaucracy and the place of bureaucracy in human
history - after all America is extremely bureaucratic, the essence of a
multinational state, the place of cooperatives, the role of trade unions under socialism
and why none of this will be repeated in America.
In America we are not going to have a stage of industrial socialism. There is
no need for the state as such to hold property on behalf of the proletariat.
Finding our place is history is more important, although I will discuss
virtually any question. If you have in fact read Mao Zedong's article I will write a
short piece on it . . . but only if you have read the article and have
questions about it.
The question is not "what are the mistakes" but rather "economic problems of
socialism." Here we can discuss the inherent limitations of industrial society
and create a context to understand what happened in the Soviet Union. The
Soviet's hit the absolute barrier of the wall of value. That puny fool and
buffoon Khrushchev polices can be rationally explained. I was instructed by my
Soviet Bolshevik brother - over 30 years ago, to never utter his name without the
words "buffoon and puny."
More information about the Marxism