[Marxism] unity on the left in Australia

aaron s. amaral amaral1871 at gmail.com
Tue Feb 5 13:22:11 MST 2013


Graham,

I am a member of the ISO in the US. I am asking the following question
because I am interested in the elasticity or otherwise of the conception of
'programme'. You wrote:

"Adherence to a doctrine such as 'state capitalism' in its Cliffite form
should not prevent or impede membership of a united, revolutionary
socialist organisation, but 'brushing under the carpet' differing concepts
and ideas about the socialist programme is not a viable option."

What is your understanding of the relationship between a discussion of
cliff-ite state capitalism (or other versions of state capitalism,
bureaucratic collectivism, or degenerated workers' state) and "the
socialist programme." In what way do debates about the former have bearing
on the latter?

-aaron a.

On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 3:08 PM, Graham Milner <gkmilner at bigpond.com> wrote:

> ==============================**==============================**==========
> Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
> ==============================**==============================**==========
>
>
>
>
>
>  Tom O'Lincoln WROTE: "As for "dropping state cap"...I suggested that
>> agreement with this should be a membership requirement, but so far no
>> reply from the editors."
>>
>> But seriously, Tom, who gives a shit ? Who is the least bit interested
>> in the OFFSHORE theory of state capitalism -- or not -- in the 21 st
>> century?
>>
>> [There may indeed be some but you could possibly count them....]
>>
>
> I cannot see how one could avoid debating the issue of 'state capitalism'
> if unity is to be achieved between two groups such as the Socialist
> Alliance and Socialist Alternative.  As a former member of Socialist
> Alliance (for eight years), and now a non-party revolutionary socialist, I
> have been attempting for many years to engage Socialist Alternative and the
> International Socialist Organisation (Solidarity) here in Perth, WA in
> discussion and debate over the central theoretical shibboleth that defines
> these groupings as part of the 'International Socialist Tendency'.   I have
> had little success in this endeavour, particularly with Socialist
> Alternative.
>
> Adherence to a doctrine such as 'state capitalism' in its Cliffite form
> should not prevent or impede membership of a united, revolutionary
> socialist organisation, but 'brushing under the carpet' differing concepts
> and ideas about the socialist programme is not a viable option.   Only with
> vigorous debate and discussion of these important political and historical
> questions can the left move forward, in my opinion.
>
> ______________________________**__________________
> Send list submissions to: Marxism at greenhouse.economics.**utah.edu<Marxism at greenhouse.economics.utah.edu>
> Set your options at: http://greenhouse.economics.**
> utah.edu/mailman/options/**marxism/amaral1871%40gmail.com<http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/amaral1871%40gmail.com>
>



More information about the Marxism mailing list