Date: 30 Oct 96 21:01:01 EST
From: robert scheetz <76550.1064-AT-CompuServe.COM>
Subject: M-I: Revolutionary Party?


Adam Rose,

Hope you won't mind an obvious question: 
In a core country in "normal" times, excluding bourgeois
electoralism/parliamentarism/reformism, and also, of course, any romanticism of
militancy ("...the barrel of a gun", Hezbollah's megalo-notion of toppling the
World Trade Center,
Ted Kazinski, etc.), what's left, aside from cultivating itself with its
perfervid house organ and maybe proselytizing students,... for a "revolutionary
party" to do?

Aren't there "issues", as with imperialism and racial justice in
the US in the '60's, (and corporate "downsizing" and digital "automation" today)
which have revolutionary potential but rather compel united front strategies?
In this context what would it mean to be "a party of
revolutionaries"?

A recent news item told of an effort by holocaust survivors
to recover from Nazi Swiss bank accounts.  To the extent that
this litigation threatens the world institution of numbered
accounts and off-shore banking, would not this constitute
a modern, core-country, revolutionary programme even tho
it would entail implicit validation of the bourgeois justice
system, etc.?



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