From: "Peter Jovanovic" <peterzoran-AT-hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: AUT: capitalist cuba?
Date: Sat, 09 Mar 2002 12:09:15 +1100


hi all

Of all the people attacking the reactionary baggage of Leninism on this 
thread Scott Hamilton chose to attack me alone. Not surprising given our 
frequent arguments over the last six months on both this list and the Love 
and Rage list. After our last bout on the L&R list in January I was hoping 
to stop these periodic stoushes but I feel compelled to defend myself again.

>>Mohammad Alam seemed to me to have written a very
>reasonable, thoughtful message which tried to defend
>certain aspects of Cuban society without apologising
>for others. Alam explicitly criticised Stalinism and
>acknowledged the complexities of the Cuban situation.
>He did not engage in any personal abuse of those who
>took a different line on Cuba.

As commie00 pointed out he implied autonomist = liberal and utopian. I could 
care less about Alam, my venom was directed at Proyect for his lame move of 
forwarding insults from a non-list member. Which BTW is something you did 
too Scott - last May or June in the crisis debate.

>Yet Peter has decided >that Alam's piece is 'crap', that Alam is a 
>Stalinist >('icepickhead'), and that Alam exists on the 'other >side' of 
>the class struggle.

As Andy pointed out icepickhead =Trotskyist since it was an icepick that 
killed the great counter-revolutionary. Although you might be write that 
Alam is a Stalinist given his dad's association with Alexander Cockburn's 
'Counterpunch'. No doubt Alam wants to destroy capitalism just as much as I 
do but the fact is his Leninist politics do place him on the wrong side of 
the class struggle. However I remain hopeful that most young Leninists will 
defect from their sects when new proletarian struggles emerge.

>Peter has made the same
>sort of comments about Leninists and social democrats
>(he tends to conflate the two categories) on many
>other occasions, on this and other lists.

I'm not the only one to argue that Leninism is the 'revolutionary' wing of 
social democracy. Why not have a go at Gilles Dauve, Aufheben and the other 
communists who have argued this line.

>If Peter's comments have any real meaning for him,
>then I assume that he believes that all organisations
>and movements with Leninist and/or social democrat
>participants are analogous to Popular Fronts, and have
>to be criticised and avoided. It would be interesting
>to know what sort of political practice he has
>evolved, on the basis of such a principle.

My political practice is pretty minimal apart from various email lists. An 
admission you no doubt wanted to elicit so as to attack me for my 
non-activism. As i've said before in the absence of genuine mass proletarian 
struggle I see no reason to get heavily involved with the various Leninist 
created campaign/recruiting groups.

>I noticed
>him recently on an Australian e list,  advertising an
>'Argentina Solidarity' demonstration in Canberra; did
>he seek to exclude Leninists-social democrats like
>Alam from that event? Did he intervene at the planning
>meeting and demand a ban? Did he question those who
>turned up, to make sure they were 'pure'? Why didn't
>he note at the bottom of his advertisement that
>certain elements were not welcome?

Ascribing that position to me is a bit of a stretch. I've never sort to 
exclude Leninists from protests. My position is that for social movements to 
be successful they will have to overcome the baggage of Leninism/Social 
Democracy/Trade Unionism.
>
>If Peter thinks that Alam is on the other side because
>he sympathises with some aspects of the Cuban state,
>how could he he treat the 99.99% of Australian workers
>who have illusions in one or another aspect of the
>Australian state, which is surely as capitalist as
>Cuba's? Would they be allowed onto the Canberra
>picket?

More strawman rubbish here. I am far harsher towards Leninists than I am to 
'apolitical' workers because Leninists take up some demands of the 
proletarian movement in order to go no further.

Peter

PS. The reason I responded to Proyect and Alam despite commie00's, Harry's 
and Harald's good responses to them on the facts is that I wanted to get 
myself a bit aggro for the sparring session I was heading off to at my 
kung-fu club. So thanks Louis you were just what I needed.

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.



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