From: "Harald Beyer-Arnesen" <haraldba-AT-online.no>
Subject: AUT: Re: marxism vs. leninism
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 23:52:43 +0200



>as for "the party", marx saw the part as something which arises organically
>out of the proletariat in struggle, and which would be organized in ways
>similar to how we envision a communist society... that is:
>non-hierarchically. so: for marx, the party was not something to be
>organized from above by intellectuals trying to find the right programme,
>but is something which would be organized from below by the proletariat
>itself if and when it needed it.


This is _not_ important. But I do find that autonomist marxist at times
reads
into Marx what they wish to. As far as the historical record goes, the party
Marx argued for, while not being the later leninist party, seems in fact to
have
been the social democratic one. This was also pretty much what the split in
the first international revolved around, and which would have placed the
autonomist
marxist, council communists etc of today in the anarchist camp.
    There is little too point too that Marx had much too understanding of
the dangers
involved of reproducing hierarchical and bureaucratic forms. On the other
hand, the logical conclusion flowing from Marx's critique of capital is
anarchistic
in the best sense of the word (and here you also you find formulations that
might as well been articulated by Bakunin. Not strange, knowing how strong
they both were influenced by the writings of Hegel.).
    Anyway, this is very much past history. It does not really matter that
much.

Harald



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