[Marxism] Of victory and victories
sabocat59 at mac.com
Mon Dec 15 08:49:52 MST 2008
S. Artesian wrote:
<My views were pretty much
formed when I reviewed my work in the civil rights movement and
explore what actually triggered the movement-- and that was
change in the techical means and social relations of production, the
mechanization of Southern agriculture during and after WW2, the
industry and the concomitant need for access to "free" black labor.
on that reading and what I knew about Marx and uneven and combined
development, I thought it clear that the "democratic" "national"
this struggle was temporary, transitional, and would of necessity be
transformed and replaced by class struggle, since at core the issue
emancipation is the issue of the organization, use, and emancipation of
This economistic perspective reads as if the civil rights movement
was initiated by a group of white industrialists, to fulfill their
"needs" for cheap labor. But anyone who has lived in the south
understands that it was, and is, much more than that, a point which
seems to be at the crux of your differences with Joaquin. The
movement was primarily about political representation, as Sr. Bustelo
has pointed out ad nauseum on this list. Civil Rights = Voting Rights.
Marx and Engels' political writings reveal a more nuanced
understanding of the relative autonomy of the state, and the vertical
dimension of factional struggles within the ruling class, than many
latter day marxists seem willing to acknowledge. Even a cursory
reading of one book, "Karl Marx's Theory of Revolution, Vol I.", by
Hal Draper, should be enough to disabuse the reader of mechanistic
interpretations of the critique of political economy.
The "democratic and national" element of the struggle may indeed be
temporary and transitional, but we're still in it.
More information about the Marxism