Date: Mon, 29 Sep 1997 18:25:12 -0400
Subject: M-G: Brotherhood of the counter-revolutionaries


When Clinton, the Pope, Castro, Jian Zemin and others of their ilk gang up
to vilify the revolutionary struggle of the oppressed people as "terrorism"
it is good to remember the words of Karl Marx:

"A kind of brotherhood does indeed exist between the bourgeois classes of
all nations.  It is the brotherhood of the oppressors against the oppressed,
of the exploiters against the exploited.  Just as the bourgeois class of one
country is united in brotherhood against the proletarians of that country,
DESPITE THE COMPETITION AND STRUGGLE OF ITS MEMBERS AMONG THEMSELVES, so the
bourgeosie of all countries is united in brothehood against the proletarians
of all countries, despite their struggling and competing with each other on
the world market".

Deutsche-Brusseller-Zeitung, 9 December 1847.


And now that the sanctimonious apologists for Castro, have hurried
themselves to set up Aristotelian categories with which they seek to find
"distinctions" among this united front of reactionaries, this united front
of world fascistic imperialism spearheaded against the revolution.  

They seek to find the odd sliver of virtue among the mountainous filth of
reaction, to find something worth defending in the rubbish bin of history -
a gesture here, a straw in the wind there, a wink in their direction by this
or that reactionary, so that they may demand that the same brush may not be
used by revolutionaries to tar and feather the Castros and the Jian Zemins
like they richly deserve.

How anti-Leninist they are!  For Lenin - like for every worker - when "trees
are being felled and the chips fly" - i.e. when the fate of the revolution
is involved:

"The whole world is divided into two camps: "us", the working people and
"them" the exploiters". - V.I. Lenin

However, for the apologists of Cuban revisionism such collaboration in the
front of imperialism against the revolution is only "a minor part of the
"foreign policy" of a "genuinely socialist state"!.  The real question, is
are such people as Hillier, Dover, McKinsey, Balut and Co. really a part of
the proletarian "us" or are they simply a part of the bourgeois "them"?

On the one hand they speak of despair and of an unmitigated period of
reaction world-wide.  On the other, there where the revolution is really
advancing and on the upswing - that, for them, is only a "minor part" of the
"foreign policy" of a "genuinely socialist state"!

They tenderly weep crocodile tears and take side with the revisionists in
feigned indignation - they wipe out the barely dry paint of their own
movable "dividing lines between Marxism and revisionism", wax lyrical about
"Marxist categories" and truculently bang the "Kruschovite shoe upon the table".

Their "internationalism" is the internationalism of the imperialists,
social-imperialists and their servants. They too are united in brotherhood
against the proletarian of all countries.

It is useless to expect otherwise.  As Marx said:

""In order for peoples to become really united their interests must be
common. For their interests to be common the existing property relations
must be abolished".

So, what property relations are Clinton, Kohl, Blair, Jian Zemin and Castro
upholding?:

Joint stock companies and the pursuit of profits, "public ownership", joint
ventures with imperialist financial capital, and Plcs!  

What common intersts can these people have with the proletarian of all
countries?

What common interests have their apologists with them?


That is the question!



Adolfo Olaechea

  



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