[Marxism] Re: Welcomed Back
l.willms at jpberlin.de
Sun Oct 23 06:14:00 MDT 2005
. On 23.10.05
wrote marvgandall at videotron.ca (Marvin Gandall)
in 001901c5d7c2$4a145180$0202a8c0 at MARVIN
about Re: [Marxism] Welcomed Back
>> Critical moments, CB asks? Where? Where and when-- China 1926-27;
>> Indochina 1937; Spain 1937; France, etc. etc.
MG> The difficult question (perhaps I'm alone in
MG> this on the list) is why - in all of the historical situations where
MG> these rival lines were tested - the masses opted in the end to follow
MG> the leaderships of the Communist parties rather than the currents to
MG> their left like the Trotskyists and anarchists?
Because the question was not really posed. There was no
revolutionary leadership, or that leadership made grave errors.
MG> This also includes the Russian Revolution, where the Stalinists
MG> crushed the Left Opposition.
No, no, no. The Russion Revolution was led by the revolutionists,
and the socialdemocrats, i.e. those whom you see as the "natural"
leadership where pushed aside.
Stalinism came later as a reaction _against_ the Russian
Revolution, and as a movement to _crush_ the leadership of that
MG> The customary response is that the masses were manipulated or
MG> terrorized into submission or both,
No, there was not yet a revolutionary leadership built who could
take over. That was quite visible in 1914. Only in Russia, where Lenin
had build the Bolshevik faction against the Mensheviks (which you
apparently see as the "natural" leaders of the masses) did the war
turn into a successful revolution.
MG> I'm more persuaded that the revolutionary masses regularly accepted
MG> the leadership of the CP's and social democrats ahead of the
MG> Trotskyists and anarchists because the twentieth century tasks in
MG> these societies were radical-democratic rather than socialist ones -
MG> primarily land reform in the developing countries, and trade union
MG> rights and social insurance in the capitalist democracies - and that
MG> the hope and expectation that these struggles would grow over into
MG> socialist ones were, at best, wildly premature.
The transition to socialist tasks is something different, but the
revolutionary crises cited above did not give birth to successful
revolutions because the stalinist leaderships did _stop_ the fight for
land reform and national independence, in order not the propertied
classes which they saw as the natural leaders in that time.
Lüko Willms http://www.mlwerke.de
/--------- L.WILLMS at jpberlin.de -- Alle Rechte vorbehalten --
"Die Interessen der Nation lassen sich nicht anders formulieren als unter
dem Gesichtspunkt der herrschenden Klasse oder der Klasse, die die
Herrschaft anstrebt." - Leo Trotzki (27. Januar 1932)
More information about the Marxism