Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 10:59:23 +0100 (MET)
Subject: M-G: Re: M-I: Mensheviking


Jon Flanders: writes
>
>   Adam says Lou P's a Menshevik. DR says Adam and Lou P are both 
>Mensheviks. Next someone else will come along and say DR is a Menshevik.
>Around it goes and where it will end nobody knows.
>
>   Could we have a moratorium on this sort of thing? How does slapping a 
>label on someone advance the discussion? 

Jon, I doubt that in fact this stuff about neo-Stalinism and calling people 
Mensheviks is in fact just name calling. It is linked very much to both 
theory, practice and program in the discussions on this list . Just as those 
who are called Trotskyists
who never built anything represent a definite political trend. Natuarally 
there are various colors to these names and trends with the present turmoill 
that exists in the 
workers movement at present after the fall of Stalinism and the desertion of 
the Social Democracy to the bougeoisie as well as colors to the various 
trends claiming to be Trotskyist.

It is not just a slump for example (or a highly interesting discussion) that 
certain spokesman on this list are trying to write off the working class. 
Where others see trade unions as counter-revolutionary.  And others stand 
for this or that on the broad versus narrow party stuff. Or others that 
fundementally are trying to liquidate the politics of Trotsky in the name of 
Trotsky..

In fact all of this wallowing around in the muck is a product of a long 
domination of the Social Democracy and the Stalinists in the Labor movement 
Internationally and naturally the relative isolation of the 
Bolshevik-Leninists and Trotskyist forces. And thus with Stalinism 
collapsing and the Social Democracy deserting even formal reformism to the 
side of the bougeoisie has its reflections on the left who in many cases 
have been tailing or supporting these two fundemental ideologies in one way 
or another in decades. Just as the "Trotskyist" forces have been effected by 
all of these historical events.

To think that this has to do with "labeling" is both empirical and a denial 
that basically their are only three to five general political trends in the 
International workers movement. The Mensheviks, the Stalinists, (including 
the Mao variant) The Trotskyists, the Anarchists etc..

Much of the name calling is in fact in regards to the fundemental 
programatic positions that the various trends take and is directly connected 
to the historical discussions and practices that have been going on for 
decades. Or don,t you think that these trends exist or existed? I mean 
Menshevism,Stalinism and Trotskyism existed and exist as a real part of the 
International Labor Movement.

To claim that we are trying to create something new on this list is not 
true. And if it is could you please explain to me what exactly that "new" 
is. In fact what i have seen here is a lot of defense of the old from 
everybody. Just depending on which particular trend the individual is 
representing. Because fundementally everthing that is said on these lists 
can be linked to the various historical trends.

I think that the party question, the which class question, the which program 
and tactic question facing the International proletariat has not really 
changed fundementally since 1917. If it has then could you please present us 
with what this new is.

One of the biggest snowjobs going on here on this list is those that are 
claiming that the name calling is irrevelant to the discussions. In fact it 
comes from those who on all of the fundemental political questions are 
trying either to cover up some of the more horrible crimes of the Menshevik 
or Stalinist leaderships. Or under the guise of creating something "New" are 
in fact just putting forth the same old Menshevik and Neo-Stalinist garbage 
of the old out and calling it "New". In fact the only reason for this debate 
is that the Mensheviks and Neo-Stalinists who programatically and tactically 
and ideologically defend those politics do not want the label. Because it is 
pretty difficult to call yourself a "Menshevik" or a Stalinist" these days. 
However a few years back the "Stalinists" were marching around with pictures 
of old Joe. The problem we have here on the list is that the fundemental 
political line of the people being called Menshevik or neo-Stalinists are 
people who in fact defend just those kinds of politics! 

But it would be much more easier to for example build a popular front 
without being labeled the names of the predessessors of just these kind of 
suicidal tactics for the workers movement-the Mensheviks and the Stalinists 
represented. It would be much easier to build a "broad" party of the whole 
class without being called a Menshevik who Lenin denounced. It would be much 
easier for the Stalinists and Mensheviks to bury their sordid past and 
betrayals of the International working class just by repeating the lie about 
those horrible sects, those horrible Bolshevik Leninists, those horrible 
Vanguard creeps, those horrible etc. etc. etc. Who actually have nothing to 
do with reality etc..

I certainly do not demand that the Mensheviks and Neo Stalinists on this 
list stop calling those who represent a Bolshevik Leninist Trotsyist 
position all these horrible names. Nor do I expect them to agree with both 
the programatical and tactitical conclusions that we have for the building 
of parties and the program for mobilising workers in a struggle for power. 
But do not try and run a snow job on us that Menshevism, Stalinism, 
Trotskyism or whatever is dead politically thus no need for name calling. 
The name calling in fact reflects fundemental political,programatical 
tactical and ideological positions on all sides. Positions which are very 
real and will have consequyences if and when they are practiced..

Because i believe the Menshevik and neo-Stalinist positions are based on 
both organisational, tactical. and programatic conclusions which will not 
lead the workers forward but backward to new betrayals. And that these 
positions have their historical roots in just Menshevik and Stalinist 
politics. But in order to do this operation they want to dump the names that 
their politics represent!

I think that helping the horse to change its spots which you in fact are 
doing under the guise of "name calling" just doesn,t get us their and is a 
bit empirical at best. When I say that Louis G. is a neo Stalin Menshevik it 
is just because he is trying to write of the working class and in its place 
put something else which if it isn,t the working class can only be some sort 
or "people's front" or "anti-imperialist" front which is fundementally a 
Menshevik-Stalinist political and programatical position that has and will 
have consequences. I think that Louid P and the "broadie" arguement is also 
a combination of Menshevik and neo Stalinist organisational conclusions 
directly related to the tactics of these trends historical predessors. He 
claims that the "trotskyists sects" never buildt anything" and I say that 
every thing that the Mensheviks and Stalinists buildt has led to disaster! 
So his claim about the "Trotskyist sects" is just a big joke if one were to 
take a look at the complete disintegration of the reformist and Stalinist 
parties. 

In fact your position which i assume is a position (not as a moderater of 
this list) is in fact the position of trying to make this list one big happy 
family of "comrades". 
Well, the question of the leadership of the Proletariat Internationally is 
not a question of being nice guys and girls. It is a serious and deadly 
discussion who,s outcome will determine the victory or the defeat of the 
Proletariat. When it comes to concrete stuggles i think that the lists 
should act in solidarity in support of those struggles. 
(Korea, Turkey, the U.S. whatever) but to join the campaign going on by the 
Mensheviks and Neo-Stalinists on this list to stop calling them by the names 
of the politics that they represent in the real world is just ridiculous. 
This discussion must be brutal and with no holds barred here on the lists. 

We are not or should not be interested in building a little cozy corner in 
cyber-space where leftists can agree to disagree with each other in a warm 
and "comradely" fashion. In fact it is like saying STOP CLASS STRUGGLE and 
let us all be friends!

A fucking utopia Jon! You are calling for the support of a petty bougeois 
utopia!
Which naturally does not mean i accuse you personally of being petty bougeois. 
Today as the International bougeoisie goes to attack all across the line. 
Where Inter-imperialist rivilry is once again turning towards a new 
confrontation. Where the precarious position of the banks, insurance, and 
fond systems could collapse over and night (Japan) sending the middle class 
quickly towards militarization or fascist solutions. Where imperialism is 
doing everything to crush the remnants of the deformed and degenerated 
workers states. (Jugoslavia,Bulgaria and the Soviet Union), Where mass 
confrontations between a International Proletariat and its deadly enemies 
over reforms in the so called welfare systems are being dismantled as the 
former leaderships of the workers movement have disintegrated or jumped into 
the camp of the bougeoisie. And you are saying now "lets be all comrades".

Look John it was the political victories of both reformism and Stalinism 
that has got the International proletariat into the dangerous position that 
they find themselves. Those "victories" have led to the situation the 
International Proletariat finds themselves in. In fact one thing the 
Trotskyists certainly can not be blamed for. Just as it was the destruction 
of the Trotskyist cadre and the liquidationist line of the fake Trotskyists 
after the second wolrd war has led to and incredible ideological crisis 
amongst those claiming to be Trotskyis. In fact all of the trends are doing 
all kinds of hat tricks to find a way out. So to call for a "moratorium" is 
more like denying reality and trying to cover up and stop discussions. The 
we are not getting anywhere is false to the core. The problem is that all of 
the various trends and the politics they represent are trying to get somewhere!
 
 It is in fact the leadership of the International Workers movement that is 
beginning to reform after the gigantic happenings of late,Or do you think 
the proletariat did it by themselves?
 
So in reality I see you above letter as a bad attempt to confuse the debate. 
In fact playing into the hands of the Mensheviks and neo-Stalinists who 
would just love to stop being called by their rightful names. The last think 
these people want is a serious discussion about Proletarian independence vs 
the popular front. The United Front in action with the right to fully 
critize and put forth solutions vs Unity in action around a mimium program. 
Or discussions around anything for that matter. At best they want to 
continue along the old line as if nothing has happened. Just a little 
correction in course. They are saying don,t call us Mensheviks or 
neo-Stalinists. I mean that fundementally their political line represents 
those trends with exactly those names! 

The Menshevik-neo Stalinist ghost is not really a ghost but has a reality in 
political,programatical and tactical positions which stem from the history 
of the workers movement. Just as the Bolshevik Leninist Trotsyist positions 
do. To deny this is to deny reality. And to try and smooth over this stuff 
and building a cozy family who agrees politiely to disagree (without name 
calling) is in fact fundementally the same thing the Mensheviks one time 
accused Lenin of doing with words like "Economist" and Bersteinians" or what 
ever. They use to call the Leninists all kinds of horrible names like 
"splitters"..

Ending up I would say that let the name calling continue as long as it is 
linked too a political critism of what a particular individual tries to 
present here. Because their is hardly nothing "new" politically being 
presented here but has its roots in the histories of the various trends that 
have in fact recieved these names. Or have these theories being presented by 
people here come from outer space or something?

 A "moratorium" as Jon suggests implies that one would in fact paint over 
what these names represent politically. Naturally if one is  accuse somebody 
of being a certain name it should be backed up with revelant arguements 
which i think the Bolshevik Leninist trend does try to do. Dave,s critism of 
the Adam's SWP fits into this category. Just as Adam in his defense trys to 
motivate his positions when he accuses Louis G or P. of being Mensheviks. 

And it is certainly not the "Trotskyists who never built anything" that are 
whining about name calling. It is in fact the Menshevik and neo-stalinists 
that time and again raise this question in order to throw mashed potatoes in 
the faces of people in order to cover up the fact that their politics as 
presented to the list do in fact deserve the name. 

I mean more concretely that writing off the working class and the "broadie" 
solution to the party question are in fact classical Menshevik and 
neo-Stalinist political lines. Just as the Popular Front and Stage Theory of 
Revolution are political lines which one can put a definite name 
on..Naturally the opposition has the right to call me a horrible "Trotskyist 
sectoide" or whatever. I can live with that. So let us stop the whining 
about name calling and discuss the issues confronting the working class 
Internationally.

PS: Does anybody have anything to say about the Japanese Banks and the 
Stockmarket? I believe this could be one way which could quickly solve the 
problems of erasing all the post war reforms the working class had gained. 
Thus not excluding it as a real posibbility to stop the many slow and drawn 
out battles that are developing in this area around the world.. 

Warm Regards
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
--------------------------------------------------------



 








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