Date: Sun, 17 Mar 1996 15:42:57 GMT
To: marxism-AT-jefferson.village.virginia.edu
From: hariette-AT-easynet.co.uk (hariette spierings)
Subject: Re: Russia's Communists --  News!


>
>    I just heard on the radio:
>
>    a.  The Communist Party of Russia and the ultranationalists in      
>    Congress joined forces to repeal the law dissolving the FSU.
>    
>    b,  Talking with journalists at the end of the Congress session,
>    Communists said "oh, this is just an statement ... Yeltsin broke
>    the law when he dissolved the SU ... We needed to correct that
>    crime"  and "Of course we are not forcing any republic to rejoin
>    us in the SU... but we leave the options open for negotiations..."
>
>        Nationalists:  "This is *not* a symbolic vote.  We are planning
>        to act upon it.  It is a program for action".
>
>
>    Question 1: What an alliance, eh?
>
>    Question 2: What kind of action they were talking about?
>
>    Comradely,
>    Carlos
>
>    P.S.: Did Gorbachov's candidacy got more than 1% in the polls in    
>    the last week?
>
>
>
>     --- from list marxism-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
>
>


Now, what we have here but a phillistine way of commenting events in world
affairs?

Firstly, a "vote", and moreover a vote of this kind in Parliament, only can
reflect the positions of the represented sections or Parties vis a vis a
metaphysical question.  

Should the "Soviet Union" be restored or not?  Marxists know that Soviet
Power will NOT be restored by any act passed in a bourgeois parliament, and
in that sense what the "communists" are reported in the BOURGEOIS media as
saying makes more sense than the bragaddoccio of the "nationalists".  It is
only a vote! 

However, nor should we deny the significance of this vote in debunking the
bourgeois legitimacy of the Yeltsin regime.  And this no to say that the
"Communists" who are represented in Yeltsin's parliament are all of one
single mind, nor that they do represent a proletarian line as a body.  

On the question of individual parties and organisations represented today in
the Russian parliament, that is a different issue altogether, and we do not
have any elements to come up with a concrete analysis at this point.

However, the question is of more than passing interest if one takes it as an
expression of how is public opinion moving in Russia today.  To be able to
do that effectively, and no "a la Ilovaisky", requires an understanding of
the Marxist position in relation to the role of elections and parliamentary
bodies, as thermoteters and plataforms to gauge and defend the views of the
class, and not to foster any hopes on any practical results emanating from
these bodies or electoral processes.

As Chairman Gonzalo has pointed out: "Power is conquered by violence. This
is the experience in the world. With a parliamentary majority it is possible
to defend a law, but power is seized by violence and defended by dictatorship".

More interesting in themselves - for what they reveal about the "questioner"
himself, are those very "questions" poised by this "commentator".

In order to smear "communism" and take a cheap pot shot in the direction of
linking communism and fascism - and therefore playing into Yeltsin's and
imperialism's hand - he unduly refers to a vote in favour of a proposal as
an "alliance".  The question then to ask this "puritan" is simple:  Had you
had a voting card placed in your hands, and the vote you are being asked to
cast is for or against the Soviet form of state - never mind why others,
like the nationalists may be voting in this or that direction in accordance
to their own political interests of the moment - how would you have cast
your vote?

For or against - or abstention.  And how would you justify your decission. 

It would be instructive if this critic - always impotently on the side lines
- was for once given the opportunity to do very much the same.

Therefore, why don't we ask here the question?  Are you for, or against, the
Soviet form of power in Russia?  I for one, even hypothetically and
methaphysically - that is, in principle - have to say that I am in favour!.

How about you?

Adolfo Olaechea



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