Date: Wed, 30 Apr 1997 02:44:37 +0200
Subject: Re: economics of communist societies


At 07.03 29/04/97 -0400, a self calling Luther Blissett (doesn't he know
that the LBs decided one month ago to sign Blissettt (with 3 t)? wrote.
>
> I am confused. In correspondence with the CWO, they rather patronisingly
>suggested that my rejection of Bolshevism was because I had "swallowed hook
>line and sinker the bourgeoise's message of nasty organisation and nasty
>bolsheviks" yet here Jock is describing the the GIK as revolutionaries. I
>am presently working on an electronic version of the GIK's "Theses on
>Bolshevism" which was also published as "The Bourgeois Role of Bolshevism".
>I thought that CWO was one of those proto-party organisations that prided
>itself on its political homogenity.
>
>Please clarify
>
>Luther Blissett

The CWO will reply if they think it worths. I state just a note:
one thing is a revolutionary group which mistaked (or mistake); o completely
different thing is the current that after more than half a century insist on
the mistake.
For example: there is a descending parabola amongst Trotsky trotskism and
trotskists, as amongst GIK, councilism and modern councilists -something else.
Ciao
m.jr
****************************************************************************
The Internationalists HomePage is at
	http//www.geocities.com/~italianleft
There is also the link to the Home Page of Battaglia Comunista monthly organ of
the INTERNATIONALIST COMMUNIST PARTY in Italy
Write to batcom-AT-poboxes.it
**************************************************************************



     --- from list aut-op-sy-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---