>>> "Erik Faleski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 09/01/99 06:21PM >>>
[This post was delayed because it was sent from an address
not subscr*bed to the list. Hans Ehrbar.]
>Charles: This may very well be true. But communists' work is not to
directly "place our hands" on that corporate-government link and reverse its
expansion. It is to communicate with those most prone to revolutionary
consciousness and undistract them from their false interests, so that they
shrink the link. Communists can't change the objective conditions.
Well, I do agree with you. However, that almost definitely rules
out socialism in most of the established Western democracies.
If we were really going to put your statement into practice, we
would have to go to the "newly industrializing nations" (I believe that is
the P.C. term for Third World nowadays) and attempt to direct them towards
revolutionary consciousness (since they are far more exploited than most
Western workers and thus far more likely to revolt)..
((((((((((((9
Charles: I think we are on the same page in the first aspect that we do not directly
make the revolution or not except as part of the great many.
I agree with you that the working classes in the newly industrialized nations have
more revolutionary potential at this point than those in the West.
However, actually, I think it is the responsibility of communists in the Western
countries to take on the hard task of changing the minds of the Western workers. I
don't think communists are supposed to go all around the world making the rev. Not
only is this true because there are national differences and we know our own fellow
nationals best ( and would make blunders in other countries because of ignorance of
their national histories). But also, at this point the lack of revolution in the West
is sufficient to stop the whole world revolution because of the strategic positioning
that the world bourgeoisie have put the West in. There has been plenty of Marxist
revolution and national liberation revolution outside of the West already, but the old
"advanced" countries' revolutions are a without-which-not for the world "show". This
old rule of thumb of Marx and Engels' is still true in an evolved way. It is not just
that there can't be revolution in just one country. There can!
't be world revolution unless there is revolution in the "top 10" countries.
((((((((((
However, you still
have to deal with increasing state power and military interventionism in the
First World (e.g. the U.S. or NATO acting as a "firefighter" to put out such
global revolutionary hot-spots, ostensively for reasons of preserving the
peace (read: preserving global capitalism)).
.
((((((((((
Charles: Yes. this is part of the qualitiatively different role of the Western
imperialist nations (the top ten) in the world capitalist system. The world
bourgeoisie have circled their wagons/built the lager against world revolution in the
imperialist nations.
That's why I say the slogan of Western communists in 1999 should be:
Workers of the West, it's our turn.
Charles Brown
--- from list [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---
