[Marxism] Left Forum 2012
lnp3 at panix.com
Tue Mar 20 07:16:39 MDT 2012
On 3/20/2012 8:55 AM, Andrew Pollack wrote:
> I wasn't at Radikha's workshop so I don't know in what context she
> recommended "State and Revolution." But I can tell you this text is of
> DIRECT relevance to debates in Occupy. Just this weekend I heard yet again
> a prominent OWSer, in a labor workshop debate over demands, say we don't
> need any demands because we have no-one to address them to. And this flows
> from their belief that we have no-one to address them to because we're not
> interested in seizing the state or the means of production, but rather just
> building our own society on the margins.
As I pointed out, the presence of such ideas is a function of
anarchists having taken the initiative just as was the case in the
anti-globalization protests of the early 90s. What intrigues me is
how that movement is capable of such audacity while the Marxist
left is content to "intervene" after the fact. I couldn't imagine
ISO'ers or members of smaller sects like the SA ever deciding to
send people to Zuccotti Park to sleep overnight on their own.
Marxist-Leninists are just not into that sort of thing.
Beyond that, there is a question as to how the culture of this new
movement fits in with traditional modes of operation by
Marxist-Leninist sects. It is one thing for a Trotskyist or Maoist
to intervene in a bureaucratized trade union movement but in the
grass-roots occupy movement, it will be seen as parasitic and
The one contradiction that the contemporary Zinovievist left will
never resolve is how their own ideas of discipline, democratic
centralism, etc. mesh with a movement that expects its
participants to operate on an equal footing. What gave the SWP its
power in the 1960s (caucus decisions, etc.) is ultimately what
undermined its ability to become a true vanguard.
More information about the Marxism