Many thanks to Jari-Pekka for his clarifications.
And for the knowledge that there are some Trotksyists in Finland -- rare
birds indeed.
Maoists (at the time) I knew, but I only met one Trotskyist there, who
moved to Sweden and was active in the USec. Pekka Haapakoski, who wrote
about the vigorous Brezhnevite youth left (seventies, I had some friends
among them) for New Left Review.
I'm looking forward to those articles -- I'd be delighted to see them as
early as possible (I read Finnish) so if Jari-Pekka is willing to mail me
them I'd be really grateful.
When my head is clearer, I'm looking forward to continuing this discussion
on the choices facing the Finnish workers movement after 1917.
What I know from personal tales I've heard is that ordinary Finnish workers
were sent to the Lapland front (for instance) in the Second World War and
found themselves (in both instalments of the war -- the Winter War and the
War of Continuation -- facing Red Army guns from ahead and White officer
guns from behind. Not to mention the biting cold.
Interesting too is the progressive nationalism of the Finnish workers
movement in contrast to the split character of the bourgeoisie, with a
reactionary nationalism on the one hand and class internationalism on the
other -- they called in Swedish and German reactionaries without a qualm to
slaughter their "national" brothers, wanted to make a German imperial
family member King over Finland and got as their most famous early
president an ex-Tsarist officer who spoke better Swedish and Russian than
he did Finnish (Mannerheim -- the one on a horse near the Helsinki Post
Office and the new art gallery).
Anyone wanting to get the emotional feel of probably most Finns in relation
to the Second World War would do well to read Unknown Soldier, the novel by
Vaino Linna. He wrote a big trilogy covering the civil war up to and after
the Second World War too.
Cheers,
Hugh
>>>As there isn't any Bolshevik-Leninist to vote so we have to vote for
>>>what we have.
>>>Of course we don't support Manner as a Stalinist but because his work
>>>for example
>>>in the Finnish workers revolution. Also we want to show that
>>>Communism/Marxism didn't
>>>die with Stalinism.
>>
>>OK, so explain this "of course" to us. Why is it a matter of course that
>>you don't support Manner as a Stalinist?
>
>We have strong political differences between Stalinists as we support Trotsky.
>
>>What difference does it make to your characterization of his historical
>>role?
>
>Unfortunatly I don't know so much about Manner that I could exactly judge
>his role. Also when we criticize Manner as a Stalinist we must understand
>that the situation in Finland was hard for Communists and most of CP
>leadership had to work in other countries and this meant especially in
>Soviet Union. So it wasn't easy for Finnish Communists to beging support
>Trotsky or any anti-Stalinist tendency. I don't know if there was
>any Bolshevik-Leninist group or even individual in Finland before
>World War II, at least I don't know any.
>
>>How does it affect your view on Otto-Ville Kuusinen, for instance,
>>or the role of the Stalinists in World War II?
>
>>From the base what I know about O-V Kuusinen I think that he was a real
>>arselicker
>of Stalin and supported many of his views from the begining.
>
>I'm writing article about Finnish Winter War and People's goverment of
>Terijoki where I will handle this question about role of Stalinists. There
>I will also look how right/wrong Trotsky was in his writings about Finland
>in In defence of Marxism.
>
>>On the positive side, explain briefly for an international audience the
>>significance of the Finnish Revolution and the role of the working class in
>>it, along with the landless rural workers.
>
>I'm working with article about Finnish Workers Revolution which
>should explain this things. However it maybe take awhile to
>finish it as I go to army in monday (3. January).
>
>>It's good that you think Communism/Marxism is still alive after the fall of
>>Stalinism, and that you characterize something important here as
>>"Stalinism" -- but what exactly is it that you consider to have died with
>>"Stalinism"?
>
>What died was e.g. counter revolutionary theory about "socialism in
>one country" which led to bureaucratic degeneration of Soviet Union.
>
>>And do you think that Marxism somehow was *alive* "with Stalinism"?
>
>I think that there was hardly anything Marxist in Stalinism but that
>some "Trotskyist" groups still adhered it.
>
>>These things need clarity if we're going to get all real Marxists and
>>revolutionaries together to throw out imperialism and create workers states.
>
>I agree and I make my best to clarify them.
================================
In Finland situation is a little different. For example I'm a member of
the Finnish Communist Party and even a vice-chairman of our section.
Early of last year as we had a general elections I was also editor of
our local election paper.
================================
>Comradely;
>Jari-Pekka Raitamaa, MO-IWC
>http://www.marxistworker.org/fi/
--- from list [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---
