From: "Karl Carlile" <joseph-AT-indigo.ie> Date: Mon, 23 Dec 1996 12:03:07 +0000 Subject: Re: M-I: Secular Trends in Western Capitalism KARL: Hi Bob! BOB: And naturally the party like the Bolsheviks that gave the class the political conciousness! KARL: I disagree with the above sentiment. The Bolshevik Party was a left counter-revolutionary force. Its purpose was to crush revolution >from the left so to speak. The evidence supports my thesis. The October revolution was not a workers' revolution but, at most, a Boslhevik putsch. When the Bolsheviks seized state power they proceeded to suppress the Soviets as workers' democtratic institutions rather than assisting in the deveopment of their proletarian democratic character. Ultimately they were reduced to rubber stamps for the the one party state that the Bosheviks succeeded in establishing. They also suppressed the factory' committees. They crushed the Kronstadt soviet was brutally crushed. They crushed the Makhnovist movement, a popular anarchist movement. They turned the workers' army from a a militia into a conventional army modelled along bourgeois lines. This involved the abolition of the democratic election of officers. The re-introduction of privileges for officers. They suppressed all opposition whether left or right that stood outside the party. Having gotten this under way they then proceeded to suppress all internal opposition within the Leininist party by banning factions. Wherever a Soviet existed that was not Bolshevik they uncereremoniously and undemocratically replaced it with a Soviet that was packed with lackeys of theirs. Underpinning all these incursions aagianst the mases the economy was taken out of the hands of the working class and put it into the hands of the Bolshevik party. The introduction of Taylorism and one man mangement in the factories shows a concern with efficiency and productivity at the expense workers' rights. They crushed all oppositon by the peasantry whether left or right by under the pretext that they were dealing with the reactionary kulak. What we were not told is that at that time in Russia there were in effect no kulaks. This was label attached to any peasants they did not like. I could go on. In short Leninism is not revolutionary but left counter-revolutionary. It has been very successful in strangling the Russian revolution. Stalinism is merely a modifed form of Leninism. The Leninist party was never a marxist party. Rather it was an overly centralised non-democratic paty. It used workers democratic rhetoric as a ploy to fool the masses. It never had any interest in workers democracy. Instead, like many of its contemporary clones, it merely sought to manipulate the masses in order to empower itself at the expense of the masses. Both Lenin and Stalin have been jointly responsible for the deaths of millions of workers and peasants. If you look at present day Leninist parties you will find that despite all their empty rhetoric concerning workers democracy and democratic structures these organizaions, when it gets down to it, are anything but democratic. They are usually undemocratically controlled from the centre, an "elite core". This is why there has been such a trail of splits and expulsions left by these stagnant organizations. The purpose of these organizations is to prevent the working class from deveoping into a solid vibrant revolutionary force. This is why they always seeks to control any spontaneous upsurge of the masses.This is why if there is an attempt to deveop debate on these lists it is usually destroyed by the deliberate sabotag of debate either through silence, abuse or trivialisation. Connected with this, these organizations produce so called marxists who are incapable of developing debate since to produce individuals capable of deveoping debate would lead to their challenging these organization and its politics. These are dashed down thoughts concerning Leninism. Karl --- from list marxism-international-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005