From: "Robert Malecki" <malecki-AT-robertsfors.mail.telia.com>
Subject: M-G: SV: SV: The puzzling Spartacist League
Date: Wed, 31 Dec 1997 09:03:20 +0100



John writes!


>Bob,
>
> The democratic centralist model would seem to make some sense,
>although you're forgetting that Lenin ordered the abolition of factions at
>the party Congress (1921, I believe) in the name of party unity. Both
>Trotsky's "militarization of labor" faction and the Workers' Opposition
>(the left wing, whose main leader was Alexandra Kollontai) were
>suppressed on the pretext that there had to be unity against
>counterrevolution, et. al. So while it is true that the classic Leninist
>model of a party which allowed at least some internal democratic debate is
>different from the Stalinist model of a party, the fact is that Lenin
>himself approved policies which quashed any kind of dissent. From there it
>was only a small step to the purges carried out under Stalin.

Well, that is your view of things. But, I take Trotsky and Lenin's side in
this stuff under the conditions that existed then ...
>
> The Bolshevik model of a tightly-knit, conspiratorial organization
>grew out of the repressive conditions of the police tyranny in Tsarist
>Russia, and they are at least understandable if you take the historical
>viewpoint. But in practice the model produced little in the way of real
>achievements for human emancipation-- quite the contrary, in fact. And
>whatever you think of the Bolsheviks, their experiences in early-twentieth
>century Russia have very little relation to our own tasks in the 1990s in
>the United States or any other industrialized country with relatively
>extensive political freedom.

Well, do you really think that the present day cozy atmosphere that is the
norm in the west will not be replaced with the necessity of and
organizational model which is absolutely vital in a situation where the
party will not be able to work openly. I doubt it. In fact I would assume
that when the shit hits the fan this model will be absolutely necessary in
order to survive and be able to lead the masses..
>
> That's another question for you, Bob. Since the USSR afforded even
>less political freedom to its citizens than the capitalist United States,
>how can you persist in referring to it as a "workers state"?

Defense of the now ex Soviet Union which is no longer defensible was based
not on "political" freedom but the historic gains of the October revolution.
The dictarorship of the proletariat, a planned economy and the destruction
of both the monarchy ang the bourgeoisie as a class. It was removed from the
imperialist chain, just as China, North Korea, Vietnam and Cuba were. But
the problem was not defending these countries against imperialism, albeit
the duty of any serious communist, but the need for the construction of new
parties which could make a political revolution against the parasitic
bureaucracy that enconsed themselves on top of October. In China, North
Korea, Vietnam and Cuba the working class never seized power however the
various Stalinist leaderships with guerrilla armyies did actually overthrow
capitalism and set up planned economies..

And political freedoms in the United States can not be measured as you do.
Because in the United States there has never been a serious workers party to
challenge bourgeis rule. But look what "democracy" has in store for you as
it plunges into the abess of new imperialist war and possible revolutions.
Germany in the thirties being a good example or more modern times the
various military dictatorships set up in for example Latin America or places
like Indonesia when the bourgeoisie see their system of things threatened..

Even today the jails and deatrh row are filled with prisoners who are a
potential threat to the racist ruling class of America. So please don't tell
us about the charms of American capitalism and all that. It is really
disgusting.

Then there are the ghettos of America where life is probably far worse then
it was in any Siberian prison camp. In fact I have a friend who spent quite
a number of years in one and could tell you some interesting stories..

But in the final analisis what you argue is there were no differences
between the Soviet Union and America and if so America is far better then
the now ex-Soviet Union. I bet even the leaders of the IWW would be rolling
over in their graves hearing the IWW argue this way these days.. They at
least new the difference between the great October Revolution and its gains
for the world proletariat. You my friend argue about how great America
is..Wow --what a guy!

I am CCing this to marxism-genreral as a supporter of yours has posted it
their..

warm regards
Bob Malecki



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