====================================================================== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. ======================================================================
On Sun, Aug 1, 2010 at 12:39 PM, Lüko Willms <lueko.wil...@t-online.de> wrote: >> I have long believed that Stalinism (particularly in its >> post-Khruschevian form) was some particular version of >> Social-Democracy, a Social-Democracy without a bourgeoisie to do the >> dirty task. > > They are both a petty-bourgeois current exploiting the working-class > movement, but the social basis is different. > > The social basis of social-democracy is intimately tied in with "their own" > bourgeoisie in that respective country, finding its primary social support in > the trade-union burocracy and the municipal burocracy (this latter is the > case at least in Germany). > > The other current, which we know as stalinism, is -- as you say -- not so > intimately linked with its "national" bourgeoisie, and can act more > independently of that. > > Consider the "left" turn in the late 1940ies of stalinist parties worldwide > after the Kreml finally realised that the US empire was not "good friend". It > is > in that period, that stalinists in Colombia started an armed struggle, that > the > revolutionists in China and Vietnam were encouraged to go on the offensive, > and that time, when in Eastern Europe the burocratically deformed revolutions > ended the direct capitalist rule in a number of countries. > >> But this is quite original, for me! Why would you say that Stalinism >> roots in Bakunin? > > It is this program of a "barracks communism" (Kasernenhofkommunismus), > as Marx called it in its critique of the Bakuninist split of the first > International, > the gangsterism of a petty bourgeois layer detached from a real unity with > the working classes, the strong-arm tactics against political opponents and > the mistrust against the working class as such which has to be commanded > but not led, all this is first found in Bakunin and his followers, and could > develop to a larger extent only after the foundations of a workers state > brought about by the Russian Revolution provided such a layer a power base, > on which same-minded groups in other countries could rely on. > > The horror of the Pol-Pot-Regime is another manifestation of that. > > Also think of the burning tires as "neck laces" to "discipline" Black > workers > by a stalinist wing of the ANC. > > This insight came me after reading Martín Koppel's pamphlet "Peru's > Shining Path - Anatomy of a reactionary sect", published in 1993 by > Pathfinder Press (Spanish as "Sendero Luminoso - Evolución de una secta > estalinista" in 1994 <http://www.pathfinderpress.com/s.nl/it.A/id.599/.f>). > > This Bakuninism is quite different from what we know as Anarchism today, > in which individualism plays a central role, and where groups end up by all of > them hanging out shingle or starting a business on their own. > > > Saludos revolucionarios desde el viejo continente, > Lüko Willms > Frankfurt, Germany This has to be one of the most asinine things I have read on marxmail. ________________________________________________ Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
