Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 14:19:43 +1000
From: Rob Schaap <rws-AT-comserver.canberra.edu.au>
Subject: Re: M-I: Jospin's compromise


G'day Jorn,

>Thanks for summing up, Rob ;-)

[As I'm about to explain, I wasn't being quite as mischievous as your wink
might indicate - nor am I quite the opportunist socdem you might think.]

>Well, let's see how *powerful* they are ... We should not forget what
>social democracy is about.

[Socdems need only talk the talk to be fundamentally useful.  At least
somebody who is being listened to is saying the right things.]

[I'd said (clumsily)]
>>(4)  While revolutionary purists point to inevitable
>>back-downs by socdems they fail to notice that, hitherto, just about
>>everybody else has failed to notice them;

[and you said:]
>I think your're wrong on this one. On the contrary, I think disillusion
>with the way socdems in most European countries tried to manage capitalism
>in the 70's when the present crisis took off is crucial to understand where
>we are today. This was one very important factor in the right turn of the
>80's (Thatcher, Kohl etc.).

[Actually I agree with you.  When I said 'just about everybody else has
failed to notice them', I was not referring to years of disappointment -
however people explain this to themselves, there's no doubt in my mind that
they have very much noticed this.  The 'them' that hasn't been noticed was
meant to be the purist revolutionaries themselves.  I don't know about
France - but I know a bit about Britain, the USA and Australia - and
revolutionaries talk only to themselves there if they do not get themselves
on selected socdem-sponsored bandwagons.  They do not start issues
(although I maybe misreading one or two industrial disputes) and they
generally refuse to soil themselves by joining those who do start them in
making 'em more public and more potent.  I guess I'm arguing their
marginalisation is as much a function of their own purism as anything else.
Hence:]

>People are aware of their history of betrayal, but when looking for an
>alternative nothing seems to be in sight.

[So:]

>This means that since we can expect more betrayals, we may also see a
>swing-back to the right - or worse: to the fascist Front National.
>And it means for revolutionaries that we *should* warn against such betrayals.

>PS: My first reply was maybe a little unbalanced, because I just got so
>sick of middle class 'greens' who totally reject any real movement in the
>base of society. My point was not to let socdems off the hook. On the
>contrary: Only if we relate to the hopes and desires which was expressed by
>Jospins victory can we put ourselves in a position, where our warnings can
>be heard.

[Yep.]

Cheers,
Rob.





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