From: "Rebecca Peoples" <wellsfargo-AT-tinet.ie> Subject: M-I: Re: Marx and Lenin Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 19:51:42 -0700 James writes: Since Marx did not hold to any such tenet, it comes as no surprise that Lenin's theory of imperialism is a development of Marx's theory, not a reversal of it. Are we really to believe that as rigorous and polemical a thinker as Lenin would have sought to hide his differences with Marx by smooth phrases and insincere flattery if he really did disagree with him? Jim holds Lenin in a contempt that he does not deserve - whatever one thinks of Lenin's policies and theoretical development, even his harshest critics agree that he was a model of intellectual honesty. I write: If this is so then how come there is virtually no reference or use of the value concepts of Capital? Lenin had no conception of commodity or capital as social relations of production. He had not got a clue as to to the essential meaning of Capital in terms of value relations. It is in my opinion this fundamental theoretical weakness which has such devasting political consequnces and is linked in with the anti-marxist nature of Lenin and Trotsky. This is partly why I have never subscribed to Leninism or what is called trotskyism. However if I am proven worng it would make life esier for me because then I could join one of the leninist outfits that dominate the radical left. So please James prove me wrong. Rebecca Trotsky suffered from a similar fundamental shortcoming. --- from list marxism-international-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005