File spoon-archives/marxism-thaxis.archive/marxism-thaxis_1997/marxism-thaxis.9710, message 266


Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 11:18:29 +0200
From: Hugh Rodwell <m-14970-AT-mailbox.swipnet.se>
Subject: M-TH: From "nice old Leon" to Doug


Yo Thaxalites!

This is a post from Vlad B to Doug H on M-General with some reflections and
two quotes from Trotsky that are just too good to keep from you all.

Cheers,

Hugh

__________________________________________________



Doug Henwood wrote:

> Hugh Rodwell wrote:
>
> >The problem with the arbitrary management of discussion we're seeing over
> >on M-International is that some of us are being excluded for not being nice
> >to others who can be as obnoxious as they please.
>
> It seems like a fundamental feature of postmodern Trotskyism is "not being
> nice to others." Most of the Trots I've seen raise cantankerousness and
> divisiveness to the level of political principle. Too bad; old Leon
> deserves better than this.
>



"postmodern Trotslyism," "cantankerousness and divisiveness"(?!),  "old
Leon"(?!) "being nice to others" (??!!).

What "others"? Class enemies, mensheviks, opportunists, chauvinists,
Stalinists, Wall Street marxists, arm-chair marxists, postmodern
marxists, repenting marxists, renegade marxists, good-for-nothing
marxists,
more-than-Marx-himself-marxists,
commonsensical-and-decent-people-in-general
marxists?

Here is something from myself and the "nice" "old Leon" to his
new admirer Doug.

****************************************

It was Hilferding who first introduced me to his friends in Vienna, Otto
Bauer, Max Adler, and Karl Renner.  They were well-educated people
whose knowledge of various subjects was superior to mine.  I listened
with intense and, one might almost say, respectful interest to their
conversation in the "Central" cafe.  But very soon I grew puzzled.
These people were not revolutionaries.  Moreover, they represented
the type that was farthest from that of the revolutionary.  This
expressed itself in everything--in their approach to subjects, in their
political remarks and psychological appreciations, in their
self-satisfaction--not self-assurance, but self-satisfaction.
I even thought I sensed philistinism in the quality of their
voices. [Trotsky then describes his meeting with Renner who was
"as far from revolutionary dialectics as the most conservative
Egyptian pharaoh"].

I was surprised to find that these educated Marxists were absolutely
incapable of applying Marx's method as soon as they came to the big
problems of politics, especially its revolutionary turns.

My first impressions were only intensified by further observations.
These men knew a great deal, they were capable, within the limits
of political routine, of writing good Marxist articles.  But to me
they were strangers.  I was more firmly convinced of this, the more
extensive my connections became and the keener my observations grew.
In informal talks among themselves, they revealed, much more frankly
than in their articles and speeches, either undisguised chauvinism,
or the bragging of a petty proprietor, or holy terror of the police,
or vileness toward women.  In amazement, I often exclaimed, "What
revolutionaries!" <...>

At those meetings, I learned...the great distance which separates the
mere passive assimilation of certain parts of a system from its complete
psychological re-creation as a whole, from re-educating oneself in
the spirit of a system. The psychological type of Marxist can develop
only in an epoch of social cataclysms, of a revolutionary break
with traditions and habits; whereas as Austrian Marxist too often
revealed himself a philistine who had learned certain parts of
Marx's theory as one might study law, and had lived on the interest
that das Kapital yielded him.

And also this:

"What importance have Leitner's articles?" he (Adler) demanded with
an amusing haughtiness.  Foreign policy does not exist for
Austria-Hungary.  No worker ever reads about it.  It has not the
slightest importance."

I listened with wide-open eyes.  These men, it seemed, believed neither
in revolution nor in war.  They wrote about war and revolution in their
May-day manifestos, but they never took them seriously; they did not
perceive that history has already poised its gigantic soldier's
boot over the ant-heap in which they were rushing about with such
self-abandon.  Six years later, they learned that history existed
even for Austria-Hungary.
*******************************

Now why did I spend half an hour of my precious time to type
these quotes and even spellcheck them? Because I believe--and I know
that in this I go against the general opinion of the list members--
that Doug has not been yet completely lost to Marx's marxism.  I typed
this so that Doug could print out the Trotsky quote, put it in a
nice frame, and read it every time he gets back home from another
lunch or party with his leftish and not so leftish friends to write
another of his "good Marxist articles."

Vladimir Bilenkin


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




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

   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005