======================================================================
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
======================================================================


It's often been observed that the danger of looking back on the experience
of former members of an organization like the SWP is most people tend to
want to date its degeneration from their own disaffection with it.  The
lines of the faction fight of 1971 or of 1973-74 were never clear save in
the minds of some of those engaged in the fight.   There were many reasons
for this, but the most important was that the leadership of the party saw
everything turning on an organizational triumph, even at the cost of
entirely smudging the argument.

Conversely, the defining position of the SWP, that prediction of a mass
rebellion of student youth detonating rebellions across the country . . . a
broadening and deepening radicalization that would continue until the
question of power was posed . . . that cornerstone position has somehow
disappeared faster than the SWP's dominance on the American far left.

Maybe there's a connection.

I'm always for keeping the record clear enough for critical thinkers to
unravel, but refighting old battles over organizations that are essentially
dead

Beyond some modest pains to keep the record straight, Marx never seems to
have been nostalgic or defense about organizations that he head joined,
founded, or with which he had been allied.  He understood them as tools with
very specific functions.  When he thought their utility was done, he went on
to do other things.

Not a bad approach.

ML
________________________________________________
Send list submissions to: [email protected]
Set your options at: 
http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Reply via email to