Date: Sat, 12 Jul 1997 02:35:41 +0200 (MET DST) From: rolf.martens-AT-mailbox.swipnet.se (Rolf Martens) Subject: M-G: Ola Eriksson & Ola Echea - eech! (3) Ola Eriksson & Ola Echea - eech! (3) [Posted: 12.07.97] This is part of a debate on the Marxism-General mailing list (M-G) managed by the Spoon Collective (see http://jefferson. village.Virginia.EDU/~spoons/), and is also sent to newsgroups. Generals, OK, this posting has a *somewhat* unfair title, since it's not qute directly about the people mentioned in it. But it's of some interest as to Olaechea's position - that of the more important of the swindlers mentioned - concerning the line of Mari=E1tegui, the founder of the PCP, to see what standpoint that propagandist of social-imperialism and of the "green" warfare by the US imperialists too, Louis "Nobleman" Proyect, takes up on the matter. Nobleman (who, well, IMO isn't *completely* devoid of good points either, please let me add this at once) just recently "butted in" (it's good in itself that others are doing this!), replying to something that Dr Sendepause wrote in reply to Sabina Astete on Mari=E1tegui. And that posting by old Pausey, which probably has already gone out to some newsgroups, I shall quote in full below, for it (obviously) contains some *facts* in the present debate. Elsewhere, I've made clear what's wrong with Dr Sendepause's standpoint on the whole, how you can see that he's not a Marxist any more. But in this matter, concerning Mari=E1tegui, he obviously in the main at least is right, and here IMO it's quite useful to listen to him. But that will be towards the end of this posting. Here first my comments on what Nobleman has to say about that reply by Klaus to Sabina: Date: Fri, 11 Jul 1997 17:57:50 -0400 (EDT) From: Louis N Proyect <lnp3-AT-columbia.edu> To: Klasber-AT-aol.com cc: marxism-general-AT-jefferson.village.Virginia.EDU Subject: Re: M-G: Klaus Sender's answer to Sabina Astete "What a bunch of worthless crap. Taking cheap shots at Mariate- gui who had the courage to think for himself, and made a mistake here and there in the process." We all agree, I think that Mari=E1tegui *had* the courage to think for himself, and that he on the whole played a positive role. But his mistakes are *not* unimportant. They show up in some clear deficiencies in the line of the PCP in Peru today. And this party has had a considerable influence internationally too. So it *is* important to clarify the matter of these mistakes. "Worthless crap", that show up the fear of the reactionary phony"Marxist" Nobleman that his and his swindler colleagues' attempts att leading some people astray will be exposed even more. It's noteworthy also that, while the swindlers Nobleman and Olaechea have some conflicts with each other, *here* they agree. Dr Sendepause today *does* take up a bourgeois standpoint. Among other things, and not least, he's *covering up* the reactionary character of the "RIM Declaration", which the US imperialists have fooled the PCP into signing, utilizing the weaknesses I mentioned in that party's ideology. He's covering it up by, during a decade now, *not* having said a word against it. *But* his recent (30.06) article on Mari=E1tegui *was* a good thing. Nobleman continues: "Should we join a fucking Mao-Stalin cult like his critics and walk around like a bunch of fucking Jehovah's Witnesses with Red Books instead of bibles?" So you see, here speaks a true revisionist. He just *hates* the Cultural Revolution in China, hates the criticism of the social- imperialism of the Soviet Union. The true adherents of Mao Zedong, such as the early NE in Germany (the then excellent party led by Klaus Sender) was *never* addicted to any "cult", but developed and made propaganda for *scientific socialism*. Nobleman further: "What killed the radical movement in the 1960s was not thinkers like Mariategui--who like Gramsci and CLR James--tried to develop a Marxism based on his national experience, but Trotskyite and Mao-Stalin cults that competed with each other who on the basis of who could most slavishly ape Stalin, Mao, Hoxha or Trotsky. You are a disgrace, Klasber. Mariategui helped to build communism in Peru. You and other ultraleft sectarians did nothing but destroy it in Germany, the USA and everywhere else you show up." It's lucky for Nobleman perhaps that he *knows absolutely no- thing* about the developments of the early 1970:s in Germany (and other European countries) and the *enormous* role that that *only* genuinely proletarian revolutionary party there, the KDP/ML(NEUE EINHEIT) (the NE) played in those deveplopments. This means that Nobleman is *not* quite as bad a crook as his utter stupidities would otherwise have signified that he was. Nobleman further: "Mariategui was not an anthropologist. His understanding of the Incas was based on the cultural and historical evidence of the 1920s." Bullshit. It was quite well-known even at that time that the Inca society had a brutal class character, quite different from the earlier classless society. At the same time of course, the development of class societies did propel history forwards, as noted by Marx etc. But Mari=E1tegui cannot be excused by a supposed "ignorance existing in the 1920:s". Now Nobleman gets to speak on an interesting subject: "What impressed him most was the idea of a communist indigenous society that could bypass capitalist development. Marx enter- tained exactly the same ideas in his ethnological workbooks that are about to be published." Poor ignorant Nobleman! You're quite right in saying that Marx entertained that idea, and wrote quite a lot on it, not least to some *Russian revolutionaries* at the time, where, as Marx thought, there might be such a bypass. What you of course *don't* know is the fact that *precisely this* has been the subject for some *quite important and deep research*, more than 10 years ago, by that very writer whom you're now (wrongly) attacking, Klaus S. (before he became Sendepause). There are several articles by him (very good ones, I think) which i.a. note the difference between Marx and Lenin here. And this was part of the basis for a criticism by Klaus S. of certain elements of Lenin's line. A *correct* criticism too. Only, around 1989-90, Klaus S. and others in the NE of that time because of this *wanted to abandon Leninism*, to a conside- rable degree at least; they because of this even wanted to change the very name of their party. *Against this* I protested, and this was part of the background of our conflict then. There's much more to be said about this. People should read some of those articles written by Klaus S. at that time. Only, the "NE" have so far *not* translated or posted *any* of them. Perhaps they'll do so? That would be good. But Nobleman, when mentioning that Marx was interested in the possibility of *bypassing stages*, actually, precisely like Mari=E1tegu, *pretends* that the society of the *Incas* was such a classless society. That's nonsense. Nobleman again: "My suspicion is that you could care less about these matters, but are just involved in a factional dispute in the Maoist subculture and are looking to score points--a struggle between midgets. This is not serious Marxist scholarship." The pro-social-imperialist midget Nobleman of course would put things that way. Actually, the mistakes of the PCP, whose struggle despite them is a just one, *is* a serious and impor- tand matter, and so, an investigation into their roots, such as has actually been done by old Pausey, *is* a valuable thing for all sincere adherents of the proletarian revolution. I on my part asked the question of old Pausey's motives too, since at the same time as his publishing that (good) article, he (and his party) keep(s) being totally silent on the matter of the "RIM" and its 1984 "Declaration". (See earlier postings by me.) But the results at least are valuable! Otherwise, neither you, silly Nobleman, nor that friend of yours, Ola Echea, wouldn't have been screaming so loudly against them! Nobleman, *your* kind of "communism", and also Ola Echea's kind, is one where there is a particular "tribe" that *rules over everubody else*, precisely in fascist fashion, precisely in the fashion of those Soviet social-imperialists whom you admire so much - that's also the old *Inca* fashion. It's only natural that *this* is what *you're* trying to peddle off to people as a "classless" society! How many among "ordinary people" do you think will buy that? Not many at all, once they see what you're up to! In order to be a little more precise: I don't think Nobleman actually would fancy himself all that much in the role of an oppressor. But it's clear that he *admires* those "oppressor tribes" at least, and wouldn't mind living in a system where he and his "title" (he does fancy himself as a member of at least the lower nobility) would be protected by one of them. So far some rather quick comments of mine. Now for the reply by Dr Sendepause to Sabine A, with its further quotes from Mari=E1tegui - the entire rest is a quote. KLASBER: Klaus Sender's answer to Sabina Astete The picture of the "harmonious" Inca society is only my interpretation? "Never did Mariategui see the Incas as a classless society" ?? The Paragraph, which was quoted by me, is very expressive and supports my comment. But perhaps, if you like, you need even more direct quotations, it is no problem! With regard to the Incan society he wrote in a very important annotation (NR. 15, El problema de la terra): "In our times autocracy and communism are incompatible, but this is not valid for primitive societies." (like the Incan one.!!) See "Siete ensayos", German edition, p.73 , OC, BD 2, p.68 Ediciones populares). The whole annotation is very interesting. Here Mariategui defended his opinion, that the Incan society, in spite of its despotic character, is a communist one. For instance here we find the remark: "The 'Ayllu', the 'Communidad' was the cell of the empire. The Incas created a unity, built an empire, but they didn't create the cell. The state of law organized by them certainly reproduced the state of nature that had been existing before. The Incas didn't use violence here. It is important to pay tribute to their work but upon this one may not forget the collective effort for thousands of years, of which this work is only the expression and last result. One may not regard carelessly or just deny what has been achieved to this work by the masses." (p.73 Germ. Edition or OC, p.68/69) Translation.) The last sentence is well said. It stressed the role of masses. But the crucial point is: "The state of law organized by them certainly reproduced the state of nature that had been existing before." That means, the society which existed before was perpetuated in the new Empire. In the opinion of Mariategui the Inca autocratic regime only organized the system of early communism on a higher level, which already existed on the level of village community. The following is another very unequivocal opinion : "And finally, socialism is founded in the American tradition. The most advanced ancient communist organization ever known in history was the Incan one." ("Obreras Completas", Bd. 13, p. 249, compare the preface of Eleonore von Oertzen, "Revolution und Peruanische Wirklichkeit", p.38) And finally, in his article "Problems of Race in Latin America" we found: "It was only by political and administrative necessities in order to strengthen central control in the vast empire, the Inca government was caused to organize this communist order, spread in their whole territory since a long time, in a certain form." (p.132 "Revolution und peruanische Wirklichkeit", published by Eleonore von Oertzen.) It is very clear, Mariategui called the Incan state an early communist order on a higher level, an autocratic reign and communism at the same time. And all I read was a very positive description of this early society. You said, that there are many articles, even describing the exploiting character of this early society. Give us some examples with quotes like "Weklu" already asked about. These quotations above disprove also your second posting from july 5 1997, which answered to "Weklu". Greetings Klaus Sender 07/04/97 / 07/09/97 (Translation) Posted on behalf of the author [So far the quote from "Klasber"] --- from list marxism-general-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005