[Marxism] RE: A sectarian approach
lnp3 at panix.com
Wed Nov 9 18:14:21 MST 2005
David Walters wrote:
>I think Louis' broad swipe at Marxist groups is akin on this list to
>stick in a beehive.
I would expect David to feel this way since he is a member of the new
international Trotskyist formation that has been initiated by something
called the Partido Obrero in Argentina. Forgive me if I don't have this
right. I am not the leftist-spotter type.
>Venezuela's class struggle has sprung up hundreds of organzations, many of
>consider themselves Marxist. If I were to criticize this new youth group, and
>yes, it's affiliated to the CMR, the "Committee for a Marxist International"
>current of Alan Woods, it is that they have this tendency to consider
>themselves the only "Marxist" current and everyone else is some how less than
>that. But in action, as they relate to the masses, they are doing what dozens
>of other Bolivarian currents are doing.
The American SWP used to "relate to the masses" as well. So does the ISO
and the WWP. However, we are trying to figure out how to create a genuine
vanguard. IDOM is very good at some things. Their material on science, for
example, is tip-top. I often crosspost their economic analyses. However,
they really don't understand Lenin in context. This is fundamental.
>It's probably healthy that the Bolivarian model, if we can call it that,
>actually rejects Louis' mechanical approach in practice, and is allowed to
>develop as a cauldron of revolutionary ideas, *especially* inclusive, but not
>exlusive, of Marxism and one of it's components, Trotskyism.
Whatever my approach is, mechanical is hardly the word to describe it. I am
not really in the business of telling people in other countries how to
organize revolutionary parties except in a negative sense--like don't put
pictures of Leon Trotsky on the cover of a magazine. I do have ideas,
however, about what should have been done:
More information about the Marxism