From: "benav" <benav-AT-one.net.au>
Subject: Re: Anarchism vs. Marxism-Leninism
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1999 12:15:05 +0800


Dear Jamal,

It just shows you how intellectually bankrupt so called marxist thought and
memory really is....especially if we reflect on Rocker's observations which
have been confirmed by his contempories and the passage of history......(see
below)

Jamal wrote:

To say that anarchist theory is ripped off from Marx suggests that:

1) You have so little faith in humanity that you do not think different
people can come to _some_ simmilar conclusions, while diverging greatly on
others.
2) You are a dogmatist who believes that the word of Marx is the word of
God and anything that reminds you of it is obviously (to you) ripped off
from it.



            "SOME YEARS AGO, shortly after Frederick Engels died, Mr. Eduard
            Bernstein, one of the most prominent members of the Marxist
            community, astonished his colleagues with some noteworthy
            discoveries. Bernstein made public his misgivings about the
accuracy
            of the materialist interpretation of history, and of the Marxist
            theory of surplus value and the concentration of capital. He
went so
            far as to attack the dialectical method and concluded that talk
of a
            critical socialism was impossible. A cautious man, Bernstein
kept
            his discoveries to himself until after the death of the aged
Engels;
            only then did he make them public, to the consequent horror of
the
            Marxist priesthood. But not even this precaution could save him,
for
            he was assailed from every direction. Kautsky wrote a book
against
            his heresy, and at the Hanover congress poor Eduard was obliged
to
            declare that he was a frail, mortal sinner and that he would
submit
            to the decision of the scientific majority.
            For all that, Bernstein had not come up with any new
revelations.
            The reasoning he put up against the foundations of the marxist
            teaching had already been in existence when he was still a
faithful
            apostle of the marxist church. The arguments in question had
been
            looted from anarchist literature and the only thing worthy of
note
            was that one of the best known social democrats was to employ
them
            for the first time. No sensible person would deny that
Bernstein's
            criticism failed to make an unforgettable impression in the
marxist
            camp: Bernstein had struck at the most important foundations of
the
            metaphysical economics of Karl Marx, and it is not surprising
that
            the most respectable representatives of orthodox marxism became
            agitated.
            None of this would have been so serious, but for the fact that
it
            was to come in the middle of an even more important crisis. For
            almost a century the marxists have not ceased to propound the
view
            that Marx and Engels were the discoverers of so called
scientific
            socialism; an artificial distinction was invented between so
called
            utopian socialists and the scientific socialism of the marxists,
a
            distinction that existed only in the imaginations of the latter.
In
            the germanic countries socialist literature has been monopolised
by
            marxist theory, which every social democrat regards as the pure
and
            utterly original product of the scientific discoveries of Marx
and
            Engels.
            But this illusion, too, vanished: modern historical research has
            established beyond all question that scientific socialism only
came
            from the old English and French socialists and that Marx and
Engels
            were adept at picking the brains of others. After the
revolutions of
            1848 a terrible reaction set in in Europe: the Holy Alliance set
            about casting its nets in every country with the intention of
            suffocating socialist thought, which had produced such a very
rich
            literature in France, Belgium, England, Germany, Spain and
Italy.
            This literature was cast into oblivion almost entirely during
this
            era of obscurantism. Many of the most important works were
destroyed
            until they were reduced to a few examples that found a refuge in
the
            tranquillity of certain large public libraries or the
collections of
            some private individuals.
            This literature was only rediscovered towards the end of the
            nineteenth and beginning of the twentieth centuries and nowadays
the
            fertile ideas to be found in the old writings of the schools
which
            followed Fourier and SaintSimon, or the works of Considerant,
            Demasi, Mey and many others, are a source of wonder. It was our
old
            friend W. Tcherkesoff who was the first to come up with a
systematic
            pattern for all these facts: he showed that Marx and Engels are
not
            the inventors of the theories which have so long been deemed a
part
            of their intellectual bequest; (1) he even went so far as to
prove
            that some of the most famous marxist works, such as, for
instance,
            the Communist Manifesto, are in fact only free translations from
the
            French by Marx and Engels. And Tcherkesoff scored a victory when
his
            allegations with regard to the Communist Manifesto were conceded
by
            Avanti, the central organ of the Italian social democrats, (2)
after
            the author had had an opportunity to draw comparisons between
the
            Communist manifesto and The Manifesto of Democracy by Victor
            Considerant, the appearance of which preceded the publication of
            Marx and Engels' pamphlet by five years."...........


Who stole what.......!?.

regards
Uri