Comment In what relation do the Communists stand to the proletarians as a whole?
The Communists do not form a separate party opposed to the other working-class parties. They have no interests separate and apart from those of the proletariat as a whole. They do not set up any sectarian principles of their own, by which to shape and mould the proletarian movement. _http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/ch02.htm_ (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/ch02.htm) ^^^^^^^ CB: So, don't aim for a communist polarity. ^^^^^ The communist goal is first and above all "victory to the workers in their current struggle." That is the communist goal - Job 1, at all times. To make the immediate and long term goal of communists the abolition of private property outside the field of victory to the workers in their current struggle is just silly thinking. ^^^^^ CB: To make it the immediate goal is silly. To make it the long term goal is right out of the manifesto you just quoted. ^^^^ Communists do not have separate demands from various segment of the working class. IN fact it is these real world demands that creates the line of march. Here is how Marx and Engels defined the task and role of communists. ^^^ CB: So, stop talking about a communist polarity ^^^^^^ "In the various stages of development which the struggle of the working class against the bourgeoisie has to pass through, they always and everywhere represent the interests of the movement as a whole. ^^^^^ CB: i.e. including the poorest sections of the working class but not only the poorest sections of the working class ^^^^ The Communists, therefore, are on the one hand, practically, the most advanced and resolute section of the working-class parties of every country, that section which pushes forward all others; on the other hand, theoretically, they have over the great mass of the proletariat the advantage of clearly understanding the line of march, the conditions, and the ultimate general results of the proletarian movement." (End quote) Here is where Marx deploy the communist concept of "the line of march." What is wrong with formulating the goal of communists as abolition of private property, is a failure to advance on the basis of the here and now. ^^^^^^ CB: Correct. Don't raise aboltion of private property now. That's the ultimate goal,not the current line of march ^^^^^^ If comrades are involved in the struggle for unemployment, and they are, that is the goal. For instance, when communist are involved in a strike, the goal is not abolition of private property but to resolve the strike in favor of the workers on strike. When the communist fought for Civil Rights and industrial unions the goal was not to abolish private property but the realization of Civil Rights and industrial unions. Why would this not be the case today? ^^^^^^ CB: Correct : do not raise abolition of private property today. Support the trade union's aims, which are united behind the O admin. ^^^^^^ The idea that establishing a communist polarity means fighting for the abolition of private property makes no sense and is hopelessly sectarian. As if communist have interest outside the proletariat. ^^^^ CB: The idea of establishing a communist polarity separate from the current struggles of the working class is sectarian. "Polarity" means separation from some other pole, like the social democratic pole, or the DP pole. No polarity, unity. ^^^^^ The real issue is my refusal to praise winning a concession. I see no need for genuflecting. ^^^^ CB: It's not genuflecting. It's cheerleading. It's expressing support, rallying the working class in each of its little victories. Comrades and workers , come rally. not genuflecting. cheerleading for each first down, each basket. ^^^^^ There are far to many other concessions to be fought for and won, than to pause and praise the Obama administration for unemployment benefit extensions. ^^^ CB: First of all this is not the only one to cheer. There's stem cell research. I don't know why you never have anything to say about pay equity for working women. There's declaration of out of Iraq, etc, etc. Part of winning the future battles is rallying and cheering for the wins we have already. As Ravi on Pen-l said it's "rah,rah !" rah rah we want a touchdown ^^^^^^ Now that not taxing a portion of unemployment has been put into effect, we might consider abolition of all taxes on unemployment, a policy change that begin under the Carter administration. We communists opposed taxing unemployment checks back when the Carter administration implemented this new taxation. We still oppose such. We have not changed our attitude in favor of somehow fighting - detached from the mass of proletarians, a fight to abolish private property. ^^^^^ CB; Sure but, we aren't there yet. The agenda of what is doable now is being set by O. And by the way, over the last 30 years, the other "team" has built up a 49 to 0 lead. So, we have to make a lot of touchdowns. You can't score 7 touchdowns on one play. ^^^^^ I find such thinking absolutely bizarre and outside the historical experience of American communism. ^^^^^^ CB: (insert here clever retort and reciprocal insult) ^^^^^ Taxing unemployment was absurd then and is absurd today. Now is the time to push to reform the social safety net - welfare, to expand to cover ever larger segments of the proletariat. Here is the meaning of a communist polarity. A communist polarity is not a concept of ideology but fighting for needs from the standpoint of the proletariat. ^^^^^^^ CB: To the extent that you go far outside the O coalition, right now this would be setting up sectarian principles of your own, by which to shape and mould the proletarian movement. It's ok to make proposals, and suggestions to the admin. , but not as a "communist polarity". ^^^^^^^^ Expanding welfare is a communist demand and issue, but it is not an issue that only communists support. We are simply the most resolute championing on this issue. When did fighting for socially necessary means of life somehow become a non-communist demand and issue? ^^^^^^ CB: Ok when did it ? ^^^^^ When Clinton reformed "welfare as we know it" the communists were in the forefront and the most resolute fighters against this reform! The liberals deserted the fight for the expansion of the social safety net! The liberals said "welfare is no good because it makes people lazy" and we communists screamed bloody murder to the high heavens. ^^^^ CB; That was then. This is now. It's a diversion to fight Clinton right now. Find ways to support O, unite behind O ^^^^^^ I really do not understand the thinking that says we communists are not the most resolute fighters for the needs and demands of various segments of our working class, in the here and now. ^^^^ CB: I don't understand it either. ^^^^^ The 30 year battle for welfare expansion, which the communists have been at the forefront as the most unwavering and resolute fighters, can be advanced anew - today, due to the widening dimensions of the crisis and the intersection of class interests. Now it the time to push harder, for this communist demand, and win individuals over to the vision and cause of communism. ^^^^^ CB: This sounds a little like setting up sectarian principles of your own, by which to shape and mould the proletarian movement. ^^^^^^ Obviously I believe in every fiber of my being that it is wrong and a disaster to try and win workers over to Obama and the Obama administration. What I write is geared to winning the individual over to the cause of communism and the study of Marxism because we have answers and a superior way to look at and understand the system of capitalist production, and why it is coming to an end. ^^^^^^ CB: This is sectarian. ^^^^^^ On a list that bills itself as Marxists I am going to write about modern communism and our history of fighting for immediate demands of the working class without compromising our vision of emancipation. Simply because we have a black democrat president, does not mean we should abandon our outlook as communist and students of Marx. In fact, the Obama administration and its fights with other sectarian capitalist interest opens up the playing field for communists and this is a good time to be a communists. ^^^^^^ CB: You aren't writing about the immediate demands of the working class. You are writing about the immediate demands of your "polarity" or "separate party ". The immediate demands of the working class are things like the pay equity bill, expanded unemployment benefits, Employee Free Choice Act, tax breaks 'for the middle class, end the war in Iraq, stop bailing out the banks ( that's one you could boo Obama on ), health' care for all, protect workers' pensions These are why masses of workers voted for Obama. ^^^^^^ The genuflecting to Mr. Obama, something he himself would find repulsive, is positively disgusting and unwarranted. WL. ^^^^^^^ CB: Not genuflecting. cheerleading and rallying people to support his pro-working class actions. Like he said , "I can't make change. You all have to make change. It comes from the bottom up". _______________________________________________ Marxism-Thaxis mailing list Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis
