Date: Sun, 15 Dec 1996 10:17:07 +0100 (MET)
From: malecki-AT-algonet.se (Robert Malecki)
Subject: M-G: COCKROACH! #25 (Marxism and the Third World)


COCKROACH! #25 

A EZINE FOR POOR AND WORKING CLASS PEOPLE.

WE HAVE NOTHING TO LOSE BUT OUR CHAINS.

It is time that the poor and working class people
have a voice on the Internet.

Contributions can be sent to <malecki-AT-algonet.se>
Subscribtions are free at    <malecki-AT-algonet.se>

How often this zine will appear depends on you!
----------------------------------------------------
1. Let's support Nigerians etc on freons!

2. RE: Marxism and the Third World

3. Marxism, Internationalism, Nationalism, and Social Ecology

-----------------------------------------------------
Let's support Nigerians etc on freons!

Rolf writes;
>Bob Malecki (with whom I differ on vital matters),
>
>You recently wrote approximately, that if I were to
>put forward an anti-"green" program that would actually
>help the poor (which you didn't think I would be able
>to do), you might support that.
>
>Well, on some of the matters in question, we differ
>on technical grounds (etc). But on one question it seems
>we're in basic agreement: Against the ban on freons.
>That means (I suppose), against the 1987 Montreal
>protocol. You had met a Nigerian who - IMO quite
>rightly - was very angry about that.

Rolf, I am against these kind of agreements yes. But that is not a program 
Rolf. Most so called trade agreements are nothing more then diplomatic 
jockeying by capitalism-imperialism before the next round of fireworks break 
lose. Unfortunately many third world countries are in boundage through 
institutions like the world bank etc. However without a revolutionary 
overthrow and uppheavals in some of the major imperialist centers it would 
be a pipedream to believe that any *real* or long term change can take place 
including the deformed workers states like Cuba or Vietnam!
>
>So why not let's form a small united front on that
>matter? Others who would like to join would be very
>welcome, I'd say.

Rolf, the problem with maoist united fronts are that they are classless. 
Which means that you are prepared to make all kinds of rotten blocks with 
bougeois formations both on a single issue, the national level or the 
international level. If you were talking about a Proletarian United Front 
which Maoists don,t then we would be getting somewhere.
>
>This might mean some real help - as far as is possible
>with our small forces - to the Nigerians etc.

The only way that the Nigerians can be helped is by the working class their 
which no longer is so small takes things in its own hands and decides what 
will be produced and what not produced. Including the refrigerators. 
Naturally it would be our duty here in Europe as elsewhere to defend the 
Nigerian workers against reactionary trade deals and laws that are directed 
against them. This could be done both in the trade unions or in 
demonstrations like the 1st of May. But Rolf would block with anybody 
including any bougeois parties, the state church, or parent and teachers 
association if he thought he could make a deal on a particular issue.
>
>How to go about such a thing more precisely?
>
>Well, first of all we'd have to make sure, as far
>as possible, that the ban *is* unjustified. meaning,
>that the (main) imperialists *are* lying when they say
>we'd all be scorched if Nigerian refrigerator industry
>etc continues as before.

Rolf, the point here is not "exposing" whether the ozone hole gets bigger or 
smaller because of freons. The point is that I defend the right of the 
Nigerian workers to produce those refrigerators despite any of this shit. It 
is a classless petty bougeois utopia the whole debate. If these people are 
really serious then they can give the Nigerian workers the factories to 
produce neon free refrigerators. Until then we defend every refrigerator 
that the Nigerian workers produce. Take your ozone hole and stick it up your 
ass!

In fact a demonstation along those lines would be just great. A gigantic 
banner saying: "Defend the Nigerian refrigerator workers!" Stick the ozone 
hole up your ass or give them the means of producing neon free 
refrigerators!" That would be a great theme in a first of May demo.

>
>A "united front" with the LaRouche people on this,
>then? Those people would probably not want us in
>any front anyway. Otherwise, I on my part would
>*not* be against a *punctual* such alliance on
>principle. But the question will probably not arise.
>Those persons are also very much *in favour* of keeping
>imperialism, the rule of the bourgeoisie, alive.

See what i mean Rolf. The Maoists just can,t understand Proletarian
 independence! Maoists would build a front with the holy crail if possible.
>
>Other people who in one way or other call themselves
>"leftists",would they join? Concerning certain of them,
>I'm rather certain that they would not, since they
>in reality *are* for imperialism. Others one might hope
>would be interested? And for one reason or other, obviously, 
>that freon ban is quite important to certain powerful 
>imperialist forces. Why?

And I would certainly not recommend joining your popular front demonstration 
either Rolf. Because you tie the working class to the bougeoisie time and 
again as always! You are trying to create freon ghosts and all kinds opf 
imperialisms in order to liquidate any kind of independant poor and working 
class politics Rolf. 

>That would be another, and important, thing to find out.
>The "LaRouches" say, if I've understod it correctly,
>that the motive is to kill the refrigeration industries
>of the poorer countries, and/or even to perpetrate
>maasive genocide in the 3rd world so that the peoples
>there would get weaker. Their theories on this don't sound 
>all that unreasonable to me. One would have to try to check
>them out.
>
>How about such a (small) programme? A certain propaganda
>and also investigation effort, I mean.

No Rolf! You have to break with the rotten popular front politics with the 
La Rouches of the world. And you have to study about fighting in the 
interests of poor and working class people independantly of all wings of the 
bougeoisie. Until then your politics are just a reprise of everything that 
has been a diaster in the workers movement. And why today as the reformist 
and Stalinist desert the class struggle a real chance for Trotsktist 
politics is coming forward. Hopefully we will find the forces
to bring this together.

However any workers demonstration or meeting that you might organize 
independantly of all of the Maoists bougeois allies that they appear to 
always find i would be interested in taking part in. Until the i am afraid 
that you must travel the popular front road with your bougeois allies and 
the Trotskyists will continue to critizie you for making deals with the 
class enemy.

Bob Malecki
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RE: Marxism and the Third World

reynaldo writes;
>While there is merit in understanding the workings of imperialism by 
>those living in the belly of the beast (westerners in advanced capitalist 
>economies),  the question is:  when will western Marxists stop blabbing 
>about revolution and not really doing anything about it?  
>
>Class struggle in industrial economies has been relegated to the 
>sidelight with the spreading of labor aristocracy.  Workers in the west 
>seem content with vacations (in Southern France, in sunny Spain, etc. for 
>western Europeans and elsewhere for U.S., Aussie, or N.Z. workers).  They 
>are happy with having relatively decent homes (compared with their 
>counterparts in the underdeveloped areas of the south) with compact 
>discs, laser discs, cars, microwave ovens, etc.  They seek economistic 
>reforms with the capitalists and may even not see any affinity with their 
>southern counterparts (many of whom are children and women who work in 
>sweatshops and may be the producers of many of the commodities used by 
>the workers of the North).  Western Marxist academics write articles and 
>lecture about Marxism and earn their living by doing so.  
>
>The greateast link to the revolutionary process in the world today is 
>found in the national liberation movements in the southern areas.  People 
>do not just mouth Marxism and quote the most erudite sections of the 
>Grundrisse, the Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts, the German 
>Ideology, the Capital, and all.  They fight imperialism with their life 
>and limbs on a daily basis.  
>
>In the Philippines, for example, medical doctors, students, teachers and 
>the revolutionary democratic section of the petty bourgeoisie join hands 
>with the peasantry, proletariat, indigenous peoples, women, fisherfolk, 
>streetchildren, prostituted children in their struggle against 
>imperialism, feudalism, and bureaucrat capitalism.  For doing so, ten 
>thousand people have been tortured under Marcos (see class suit in 
>Hawaii); villages have been bombed under Corazon Aquino; and communities 
>were displaced under President Ramos of today.  Fearless, these 
>revolutionary Marxists continue the struggle today.  Teachers (fondly and 
>prestigiously referred to as Professors "more appropriately") count among 
>the revolutionaries who have been arrested, imprisoned, tortured, 
>psychologically abused, and killed.  There are even revolutionary 
>priests, nuns, ministers, pastors, novices, seminarians, and Moslems.  
>The Philippine revolution of today is where Christianity (Catholicism, 
>Protestantism), Islam, and Animism (spirit beliefs of indigenous peoples) 
>meet.  There are many women leaders of the revolution.  Some were raped 
>or tortured;  others were martyred.  
>
>It's about time to stop talking and talking about revolution.  One cannot 
>believe in revolution in words but do nothing in deeds.  If not now, 
>when?  If not you, who else?  The time is now.  The people who must move 
>into revolution are those who claim to be revolutionary Marxists in the 
>first place.  
>
>While change is no guarantee of improvement, where there is no change, 
>there can be no progress.  Act now.
>
>Don't just talk about revolution.  Do it!
>

Rinaldo; there is a lot of truth in this letter. However the last point 
about doing it now is not as simple as you thing. And it is directly 
connected to places like the Phillipines and the national liberation movements.

But the point is not just doing it, but having a revolutionary party and 
revolutionary International to do it with and that in regards to any place 
on the planet we live. It is interlinked. Without a revolutionary 
International which links the cadre in the Phillipines for example with the 
cadre in the United States and Berlin it will be pretty difficult to succeed 
any where. And then there is a question of strategy and program that has to 
be worked out. It appears that starting this discussion about them or us in 
marxists and communist circles is not going to solve the problems. We need a 
world party and Communist International that can link the struggles on this 
planet
and move them forward and this has to be done with a revolutionary program 
and a correct strategy.

We have to stop thinking in terms of my country, my party, my turf, my part 
of the world vs the rest. We have to begin from the interests of poor and 
working class people everywhere and moving the struggle forward despite the 
uneven development.

Bob Malecki
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marxism, Internationalism, Nationalism, and Social Ecology

reynaldo writes;
>By Green Politics we mean political struggle that includes the 
>environment as part of its agenda.  Green Politics is not used to mean 
>the Green Party of Germany or of any other western European country.  If 
>Marx had room for green politics in his study of political economy in his 
>Capital and Engels in his Dialectics of Nature, why would latter-day 
>Marxists (Maoists or Trotskyists or what have you) just dismiss anti-nuke 
>and anti-freon as bourgeois hogwash in a very metaphysical way? 

I do not thing that i have "dismissed" the debate about the freons or nukes 
stuff. But expressed a fairly clear position.   
>
>It is incorrect to say that African workers want to produce refrigerators 
>with or without freon.  They don't decide the contents and processes of 
>production.  They join the mass reserve of industrial labor.  They have 
>no choice in commodity production.  They are told by the imperialists and 
>local capitalists what to do.

In and academic excercise you might get this to sound pretty good. But reality
is in fact and entire different thing. I never said that the workers decide 
anything. What i said was that i defend the Nigerian workers who do produce 
the refrigerators
against any attempts to ban these freon based refrigerators as long as those 
that do control this stuff give the factories workers jobs building non-neon 
refrigerators.
Workers work because they have to survive in the rat race system run by 
imperialism and the locals. I defend their "right" to work above any kind of 
green politics in one way or another. Only those who want to reform the 
system get all tied up in the present debate which nobody can prove. The 
only thing that is proven is that there is a huge amount of middle class 
hyseria about this stuff and thus a whole political atomosphere which 
corrupts the central class issues involved here.

The nuclear stuff is also and extension of the ban the bomb people and 
middle class hysteria and anybody going around telling the workers to 
"disarm" are either crazy or petty bougeois utopianists.  
>
>That workers are created in the course of production as a social class 
>which is the enemy of capitalists is not the conscious desire of the 
>bourgeoisie.  Rather, this is the inherent contradiction in the 
>extraction of surplus value by the bourgeoisie of the laborers.  Hence, 
>there is no common interest between them but contradiction. 

Good, great! 
>
>How can a Marxist say that we have no responsibility as to what is 
>produced?  Marxist ethics appeals to a sense of justice, equality, 
>dignity and against alienation, self-interest, exploitation, and 
>oppression.  Read the writings of the young Marx.

Easy! Give us the power and then we can talk about that. Anything else is 
deciding which color the curtains should be. As if  the working class should 
gert involved in the horrors and fears of petty bougeois middle-class 
ideology. The only responsibility workers really have is putting forth a 
program and demands which will lead to the class seizing power and setting 
up a dictatorship of the proletariat. Not to forget defending any real gains 
that reforms in the past have given the working class. But to start a 
discussion about ethics? Who's ethics the middleclasses fear of the ozone 
hole getting their kiddies or some radioactive neutrons landing on surburban 
America? Fuck off! When will we can the rats and garbage and diseases out of 
the slums of the world. More people die of under nourishisment everyday or 
die because their is a lack of clean water and medical treatment in the 
world. Let,s take on the *real* dangers to the envionment to the 
overwhelming population of poor and working class people on this planet. 

There are a lot more rats, diseases, garbage and filth in the ghettoes and 
slums of the world. Not to mention the incredible dangerous and risky 
industries around the world that produce a lot of the luxuries that the 
middle class has money to buy. The only *real* pro working class slogan I 
would be willing to support in the is the banning of dumping toxics and 
radio-active stuff in third world countries! Clean water, a toilet to shit 
in and a decent standard of housing for all! 

But to capitulate to middle class hysteria on single issue campaigns on 
stuff that endangers the middle class-forget it! 

>Hazardous wastes are being dumped into Africa and Asia.  This is a real 
>issue of environmentalism.  We call this the Toxic Waste Invasion of 
>Asia:  a classic case of the contradiction between Imperialism and the 
>Underdeveloped Areas; hence, a further impetus for an anti-imperialist 
>national liberation revolution.

This is a ligitimate demand. To stop dumping in third world countries.  
>
>We cannot just say:  "Give us power and the banks..."  This is fatalism, 
>if not a lazy person's attitude.  Revolutionaries do not ask for social 
>transformation in a silver platter.  They fight it out.  To say "give us 
>power, then we will choose non-freon aircon" is to be a defeatist and use 
>non-transferance of power as an excuse to be anti-environmental.

It is not being lazy or fatalism to demand that we want it all. It is not a 
form of blackmail either. But the envionmental quetion should be linked to 
poor and working class people and transitional demands for a struggle for 
power. Because without the power any reforms worth fighting for can easily 
be taken back. Naturally envionment can be a very explosive question if 
addressed correctly. Dumping of toxic wastes, living conditions in the slums 
and ghettoes of the world, working conditions in the factories. But utopian 
petty bougeois middle-class hysteria around a couple of single issues that 
can endanger just the middle class is a complete capitulation to at best 
reformism and the wishful thinking of this crowd of making the world a 
better place to live in mainly for them the middle-class. My suggestion is 
to give them a choice. Join the poor and working class people in a desperate 
struggle for power or...

Bob Malecki 

-------------------------------------------------------

http://www.kmf.org/malecki/

Read the book! Ha Ha Ha McNamara,
Vietnam-My Bellybutton is my Crystalball!

COCKROACH, a zine for poor and workingclass people
NOW ON LINE
--------------------------------------------------------

    







--------------------------------------------------------

http://www.kmf.org/malecki/

Read the book! Ha Ha Ha McNamara,
Vietnam-My Bellybutton is my Crystalball!

COCKROACH, a zine for poor and workingclass people
NOW ON LINE
--------------------------------------------------------





     --- from list marxism-general-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---