Date: Sun, 22 Mar 1998 14:26:36 -0500
From: "Charles Brown" <charlesb-AT-CNCL.ci.detroit.mi.us>
Subject: Re: SV: M-TH: A vulgar marxist here


Dear Bob,
 Hugh's on me for confusing who says what on here. Let's fool him and see if he can tell the difference between you and me. A little "identity" cross dressing like the working class petit bourgeoisie Boston Tea Party of a new type. You know "Lenin" was not his real "identity". He had to hide his identity from the Czarist police.
   In Detroit, "bad" means "good". You know ebonic rebellion against the old white supremacist English language. That's part of your persona , I thought, ruffling the feathers of the petit bourgeosie.


                                               Charles Lenin

>>> Robert Malecki <malecki-AT-algonet.se>   wrote at  03/22 3:56 AM >>>

 Chas. -Here's back at you, Bob, the bad boy,

  Bob  -  OK! But whats the "badboy" bit?

  Chas. - See above.

>Bob says,
>
>To a lot but this last is quite important. So we start their. Sorry Charlie
>but the Stalinists gave it away in Vietnam already at the end of the war
>
>Chas. interrupts - What war ?  WWII  ? or the  Viet Namese war of national
liberation , 1975 ?

  Bob says, Actually both! But I meant WW2 and things like the Geneva Accord. But also
today Vietnam like China is taking a dangerous path tyowards capitalist
restoration.

>
>Chas. * I don't know Bob. This sounds like white boy, armchair
revolutionary stuff. The Viet Namese took too long for you to throwout your
fellow Europeans ;  the Europeans were imperialists, mass murderers.  The
Viet Namese GAVE away half the country ?!! Gee, you get mad about that t.v.
show about U.S. heroes. I'm getting a little resentful of your racist
arrogance.  Your fellow Americans TOOK some of the country.  The Viet Namese
won a great victory for the workers of the world.  Has your group of
communists accomplished anything like that ? No.  I think I'll go with Viet
Namese Leninism over your variety.


 Bob -No not really Charlie.

  Charles -  Yes really Bobby.


  Bob - Ever here of the Trotskyists in Vietnam which were a
leading factor in vietnam both before during and especially after WW2..


  Charles - No. I never heard of them.

  Bob says - And
stop playing the poor little third worldist.

   Charles - I 'm playing the big, bad Third Worlder, who kicked the White Man's ass. Actually, I 'm giving the Viet Namese credit where credit is due. I am not Viet Namese myself. But I can kind of identify with them if you know what I mean. Identity polittics and all that.
      THE white man is not you Bob.  The Negro and the Worker are allies. See Lenin's Letter to the Negro People, or something like that.



 Bob says, In fact the American ruling
class and its lackies are responsible for Vietnam and not the poor and
working class people

Charles askes: Why do you keep using the phrase "poor and working class people " ?  Poor people are working class people. Unemployed working people, and the working poor. Your usage tends to divide the class. This is not a theoretical peccdillo (how do you spell that ?)  In the U.S. the separation of the poor into a socalled underclass and self reference by workers who have enough not to be poor as "middle class" is a huge barrier to class consciousness in the class.  Divide and rule, divide and rule.


Bob continues,
in American uniform that died there as cannon
fodder..The Vietnamese peasants and workers won a great victory despite the
Stalinists. And now your charming Leninists want to restore capitalism in
Vietnam..So you can certainly have them. But unlike you Trotskyists have
been in opposition to the politics quite a long time and will continue with
this. But with the death of the Soviet Union Stalinism is also dead and
their will hardly be any new "Vietnams"..


Chas. says - Long live Ho Che Minh. Long live the Viet Namese Communist Party. Long live the glorious victory of Viet Namese People in the hearts of the Workers of the World. !

Before, Charles had said,
>    By the way, in your Part II "to a liberal" or whatever, when you talk
about the Viet Namese girl tragically burned; and you sort of set it up that
you are on her side versus Nancy.  That was real petit bourgeois phony
stuff. I mean I'm glad you are so angry with rich people, but just because
you are mad at U.S. imperialism (you said a previous comment by Hugh about a
recent story on Viet Nam "bugged the shit out of you".) That's healthy
anger, but not good Leninism to use it as an excuse to dump insults on
Nancy. Nancy did not bomb Viet Nam.  And it was real hokie to write in a
reply to "a liberal" which seemed to imply Nancy, that somehow the
tragically burned Viet namese girl was on your side, along with the old
Black man Willie against Nancy in the argument.


Bobby turns things back right side up by saying,

Now you turn the arguement upside down. First you accuse the horrible Trots
of never leading anything.

Charles interjects - I just scrolled back. I didn't say horrible Trots never lead anything.  Leon Trotsky led the Red Army in the Civil War with the Whites. At least Trotsky was together enough to join the Bolsheviks before October of 1917, unlike a lot of other Mensheviks. Even Plekanov was bickering with the Bolsheviks when it was time to throw down.  Although Trotksyites have not led a struggle to state power that I know of , they have remained a sort of loyal opposition to Stalinism, actually existing socialism in its first stages of development.  Ironically, given your emphasis against the petit bourgeoisie, Trotskyism has been an activist organizational home to many progressive petit bourgeoisie, especially intellectuals. You know in the BIG SHOW the working class will draw the petit bourgeoisie to itself as an ally.


Bobby -
 Then you turn around and defend Nancy who never
bombed anything. With Nancy's line she probably would have abstained because
their was no gender line..And I see "Willy", Zeke, and the little Vietnamese
girl" on my side.

Charles - uh huh .

And Charles had said before -

>      In my party club, chocked full of workers, men and women, you would
have been criticized for "subjectivity" distorting your analysis.  I think
we need more attention to subjectivity in the party, but you can't claim
clearer thinking than Nancy on the class struggle by trying to make people
sorry for  the Nick's and Eddie's.


Bob -

I can't make people "feel sorry" for anything. They can only do that
themselves. In fact some of the people from poor and working class people
who have commented on this stuff say nothing about "feeling sorry" but state
in their own terms basically a lot of the same ideas..


Charles - Whatever. Trying to gain sympathy for your arguments by reciting tragedies some workers suffer under capitalism.
     I got about 400 stories of the same type myself. That's why we hate capitalism. I got a lot of stories about women suffering by male chauvinism . I got a lot of stories about "poor little third worldist"suffering at the hands of THE WHITE MAN.
     Do we disagree on that we want to stop people from suffering or that people are suffering ?  Strike that. I'm sure you will say we disagree. But aside from maintaining your persona as a curmudgeon  (spelling) ,  do you doubt that I believe that some poor and incomed working people would empathise with the situations you described ?


Charles had said last time:
>      In summary, your effort to make it out that you are with the victims
, the worse victims, and Nancy is with the victimizers, fails.


Bob -
Well she does victimize people. Because she has no class perspective.. See
my reply to her today..


Charles -  Nancy seems to have a WORKING class perspective to me.  Most women are working class, so a feminist perspective representing most women is a working class perspective.


Charles had said last time -
>       By the way, it was three old white men, communists retired steel
worker, autoworker and truck driver (among others) who taught me that a main
task of the working class is to fight racism in its ranks, that it is the
main divider of the working class.  They based their analysis on Marx and
Lenin and years of experience at the point of production.    Again sort of a
flip side of the point of your old Willy story on a Black man making a class
point, These white workers make a national liberation point. These three had
stories of their suffering, like your "part two to a liberal ". One went to
jail for eight years during McCarthyism. So they are working class victims
if that's the premise for arguing for you.


Bob retorts ,
National liberation my ass..According to you your "workers" fought racism in
the ranks (meaning union) and this is a class perspective to unify the class
against the class enemy. Only the Stalinists could possibly wind up with
this extremely dangerous idea of "national liberation" which is nothing
other then a suicidal ticket to extinction..Against this is a multi-racial
class struggle and party which vyes for state power in the interests of the
whole class..


Charles says -   "My" workers were their own men and were just as much workers as you are a worker. They fought racism in the union and in other venues and  institutions of the working class. Another slogan they had was  " One class one fight. Black and white unite and fight "  more working class terminology than "interpenetration of peoples " and "revolutionary integrationism". Yes, there is a unity and struggle of opposites here - national liberation and proletarian internationalism, at the same time. Read Lenin on national liberation and social emancipation for the revolutionary resolution of this dialectic. Your  LIVING  brain will tell Fraser a thing or two after you do that.

>Chas. had said last time - Bob your version of history is getting more and more dillusionary (
can I say that without Hugh defending your "closest thing we've got to an
authentic working class voice" ?)   So, you don't see the defeat of
apartheid as a liberation. It's really all or none with you , isn't it ? 
Did you ever here of minimum and maximum program as part of Leninism ?

Bob fires back !
Oh I see! Sort of like Socialism in one country and all that. well where has
all this stuff gotten you. The Soviet union is dead. China is well on the
way and Fidel is on his knees to the pope. And in fact the only thing that
has happened is that Stalinism and Nationalism in South Africa have given
the bourgeoisie time to reorganize and stay in power. The very same people
who stood for apatheid are now in power with the good wishes of the CP and ANC..


Charles =AF Hey ! Wait a minute. You are right. Bob I appreciate you taking the time to argue this out with me.  I have got to rethink everything.  What is your phone number.


Charles had said,
>  By the way, regarding our debate generally, I forgot to remind you that
Lenin modified the  slogan. It is now: Workers and Oppressed Peoples of the
World Unite ! Is that alright with you ? Afterall Lenin was a lawyer, so
there might have been some petit bourgeois nationalist sentiment slipping in
there.He didn't say "unite but remember the workers are still the leader of
the two of you ", like it sounds like you want to add on.


Bob remarks,

I have nothing against Lenin's formulation just the Stalinist interpetation
which has lead to defeat after defeat of the working class and know with the
demise of the Soviet Union has buried Lenins work..


Charles -  What is to be done ?


Charles had mentioned,
>  And more on Lenin, the revolution was an alliance of workers and
peasants. Lenin knew the workers would have to form alliances with other
oppressed groups.
>   Then on having anything to do with the bourgeoisie, Lenin set up
bourgeoisie in business under the NEP. A Leninist attitude toward the
bourgeoisie is not superstitious.


Bob says,
Classical stalinist mish mash. You still don't get it right Charlie. Lenin's
"alliance"" with the peasantry was connected to the DOP and the Proletariat
in power..The stalinist line is the block of four classes and the slaughter
of the Shang Hai proletariat and much more..


Charles - Are you saying that the NEP was Stalin's program ?

     All power to the revolutionary "dictatorship" of the proletariat, necessary for suppressing the ever more monsterous dictatorship of the now super-imperialist bourgeoisie.  Since half of the proletariat are women, the DOP hereby declares itself a feminist international. It's not so much an alliance with "women". Women are half of the proletariat, and these advanced thinking men workers realize a key class unity will be consolidated if they divest of patriarchy. The proletariat are real men, conscious species-beings.

> Chas.- You complained about the Viet Namese taking too long to throwout
the imperialists. How long is it taking  ICL inter-penetrating peoples and
revolutionary integration to work ? Are there some Stalinists in ICL
screwing it up ?

Bob,
Maybe Charlie.

Charles - Did you like that one , Bobby ?


Bob continues,
.But the Trotskyists never handed it over to
capitalism/imperialism like the Stalinists now have done in the ex SU and
well on the way in China..

Chas. -  Bob, what did the Troskyists have to hand over ?  I can see you saying the Chinese might become capitalist /imperialists, but I don't see them "handing it over" to some other capitalists. Don't you think that pernicious nationalist non-liberation might block that ?

>Chas. -  my post-whatever theory is that the working classes in the  France
and the ex-Soviet Union are so mature that they acted without the party. The
Soviet People diminished the threat of nuclear species-suicide by
surrendering in the Cold War, giving up their primitive socialism. And  the
French working class is the Dutchboy with its finger in the dike against=20
European unification.

Bob,
Well well, now. The working class gave up their "primitive" socialism did
they now.
It is all the masses fault now Charlie.

Charles- No, you misunderstand. I am saying the working class did good.  They got rid of the Party in the SU (for the reasons mentioned. It was not the masses fault, but their virtue, in contrast with the Stalinist, bureaucrat's fault. They overcame the misleadership you describe.  They don't have socialism, but it is not capitalism.  As you said, stayed tuned to see what the working class in Russia, and France does next, to an extent without a vanguard. It is a super workerist hypothesis I am putting forth. I am not conservative like you.

Bob,
Typical of the Stalinists to find a
scapegoat other then the Trotskyists for their rotten politics. A new twist
in the involvement of Stalinism . It wasn't the trots but the masses fault
that the SU no longer exists.


Charles - No, no. See above.

The French stalinist Charlie are in the popular front government which
breaks strikes and imposes its racist austerity program on immigrants.
Nothing new their they always did this i. In fact during the Algerian war
they turned not only a blind eye to the massacre of Algerian workers but
actively took part in voting for war credits for the imperialist occupation..


Charles -  What did the Trotskyists do ? Saved the day no doubt.
>
>Chas. - I agree you have the conservative position. Not because it is loyal
to the old fashion , real Leninism - your positions are a caricature of
Leninism - but because your insulting treatment of the working class's
allies helps the bourgeoisie retain the status quo.

Bob -Always looking for those bourgeois allies Charlie.

Charles - No allies among the working masses , like peasants and newly proletarianized strata (See the Communist Manifesto on the proletarianization of former middle strata,  wage laborization.  Also, the petit bourgeoisie are objective allies of the working class when the BIG SHOW  goes down.  See Lenin on this.

    Our (the working class) attitude toward the bourgeoisie is to divide and use them. For example, Lenin did not allie with the bourgeoisie (like the American Armand Hammer) he played chess, using their interimperialist rivalries.  Lenin said the capitalist will sell us the rope with which we hang them. Scared of the bourgeoisie are you , Bob ? Don't be superstitious

Bob -
 The stalinists never
learn and they always drown the poor and working class people in blood..

Chas. - I'll mail you some red liquid. I want you to drink it until you choke.


Charles had said,
>      In the U.S. women and Black people make up over half of the working
class.  Only a party with a radical program connecting working class victory
to the other liberations ( the half of the story that you say is the whole
story) AND specific programatic actions against racism and sexism will unite
the working class for victory against capitalism, sexism and racism.


Bob trots out,
The Stalinist pop front line in a nutshell. Unite everybody against
capitalism. Where ever have the Stalinists got it right?

Charles - That's the last word this time . Bob

>  Chas. - Is it talk radio ?  with callins ?


   Bob -Both I believe!

Chas. - I got a short wave radio when I was in Moscow. What's the phone number.?


 Charlesb.

P.S. Hugh, I hope you could tell who said what. Let me know.


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


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