[Marxism] Lenin on "pure" social revolution
eindeoc at freenet.de
Tue Aug 7 10:41:03 MDT 2012
On 07.08.2012 18:09, Paul Flewers wrote:
> Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
> Einde O'Callaghan wrote: 'Of course, there's no guarantee that any
> revolutionary upheaval will lead to victory for the most radical
> anti-capitalist forces. And we shouldn't forget that the revolutionary
> process opened up in 1916 ended up 7 years later in the victory of
> clerical reactionary forces who introduced the "carnival of reaction"
> that James Connolly predicted would be the result of the partition of
> Ireland -- a carnival of reaction that still casts its baleful
> influence on Irish politics. But that doesn't devalue the
> revolutionary struggles of the intervening years.'
> But is not this sorry result in Ireland precisely why one should not
> have a romantic view of an opposition in Syria that brings together
> all sorts of elements, from socialists through democrats of various
> stripes to outright religious reactionaries? Should we not be looking
> at precisely what the opposition in Syria represents, what currents
> there are within it and which ones should be supported, rather than
> condemning the opposition in toto as a reactionary puppet of the big
> powers, or conversely cheer-leading it in an utterly uncritical
That is, of course, the point I'm trying to make.
More information about the Marxism