[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." 


Melvin P. 

More information about the Marxism mailing list