[MLL] Comrades - Do Your Duty

[Hantayo000]

Dear Comrades,

Comrade Sanjay stated:

Dear Comrades,
I have not been able to follow the discussions of Comrades Mark Scott, Alan Dover  And Klo in detail as I have been involved in other work.

One further clarification is desirable.

Isaac Deutscher was a Trotskyite since at least the 1930s when he was in Poland. Escaping from fascism he emigrated to the UK where he worked as a journalist.

His biography of Stalin  which came out in 1949 was undoubtedly written from a Trotskyist vantage point. This was accepted by both the Communists and the Trotskyists. The CPGB press published strong critical reviews  of the political  biography of Stalin. I personally find it amazing that a member of this list after reading this book can conclude that it is not a trot biography.
With Regards,
Fraternally,
Vijay Singh.


Again, I would like to thank Comrade Sanjay for his contribution which speaks volumes.

The point I was presenting in my statement about not knowing the works of Duetscher and deferring to a very trusted source or Comrade who was familiar with this Trotskyite was precisely true.  Although I did not know his works I will say that I knew of them - a big difference.  Since I did not know the works firsthand I refrained from dogmatic arguementation but stated I would in fact research the works.  I have to a small degree and the material I find confirms my assumption of Duetscher's Trotskyism and it most certainly confirms the validation of Comrade Sanjay and other Comrades I have spoken with all who have firsthand knowledge and experience with Duetscher.

For Klo to maintain that he did not know Duetscher was a Trotskyist is in my opinion a bald-faced lie.  Deutcher was a Trotskyist prior to writing Klo's beloved "classic" of Stalin by Duetscher, he was a Trotskyist at the time he wrote this "classic" and he was a Trotskite after reading it.  Klo knew information about Duetscher and his wife but insists on denying he knew Duetscher was a Trotskyite but that he "very well could have morphed into a Trot later."  Klo has been a "Marxist" most likely twice as long as I have and prides himself on his "intellectual" ability but yet material he considers "classic" he claims he had no knowledge of it being Trotskyist!  This is not credible and it is a lie.

Klo has a propensity to assert his arrogant intellectual superiority over others based on nothing but petty-bourgeois ideology and pedantics based on a Trotskyist style of manueverings or tactics dressed up in flurries of Marxist semantics and opportunistic quoting of Lenin to support his revisionist position and views.  Klo's arrogant and egotistical opportunism is seen in such statements as:  "Unlike you, I can quote Lenin because he and I are in agreement and a tremendous number of comments by him substantiate my assertions."  We are supposed to believe that Klo's sophism is substantiated by Lenin!!  Klo cannot show where he and Lenin are in the least bit agreement but Klo's revisionist position is obvious in his complete negation of Lenin and Stalin leading a successful proletarian revolution.  His revisionism is shown in his complete negation of the documented historical significance of the October Revolution.  His revisionism is shown in his negation of the documented history of the Bolshevik Party.  His revisionism is completely shown in a total negation of the essence of the October Revolution and his warped interpretation of what the proletariat is.  It is true that Klo can argue from an almost convincing Marxist terminological point of view but this is his sophistry.  This is true of most revisionists and why revisionism has dealt a blow to socialism.  Revisionism is almost identical to Marxism in regards to how the revisionist is capable of using sophist presentation of "Marxist" views but in the end revisionism always seeks to undermine and destroy the credibility of Marxism as a viable, relevant and revolutionary theory and this is done by negating primarily the essence of Marxism-Leninism which is based on proletarian revolution and the dictatorship of the proletariat.  Klo does precisely this, he negates Lenin and Stalin on who the proletariat is, he negates the documented historical significance of the October Revolution as being a proletarian revolution by reducing it to a mere function of "assisting the peasantry" and he negates the historical significance of the October Revolution as documented by the CPSU (Bolsheviks) but he wants to present his lie to mislead some that he and Lenin are in "aggreement" and that "a tremendous number of comments by him substantiate my assertions."  Somehow we are supposed to believe this sophistry that Lenin's comments "substantiate" Klo' s assertions as if Klo were the originator of these assertions!  Typical Trotskyite manuevering!  The only real difference between Trotsky and Klo is that even Trotsky recognized the October Revolution as a proletarian revolution that led and not "assisted" the peasants!!!!  The exact likeness of Trotsky and Klo is that Trotsky tried to project his revisionist sophistry by a constant referral to Lenin to present the lie that he and Lenin were "in aggreement"!!!

Klo wants us to believe that he is superior to others because of his correct political line which is demonstrated by his arrogant repudiation of everything that all of his oppoents challenge.  Somehow we are to draw the conclusion that this opportunist is the "New Age Lenin" that cannot be wrong but is always correct on every single issue.  We are to believe that this opportunistic "New Age Lenin" knows all and is above being challenged because only he has the correct political line!!  But what is that political line???  He never says!!  Never once has this opportunist ventured forth a substantial analysis of events, historical or current.  He has however, continuously repudiated more than the majority of analysis' put forth by every Comrade that has.  However, even his repudiation is only based on pedantics and never an original arguementation.  In his desperation of late he argues not from an original application of the dialectical process but from a purely meytaphysical mutilation of quoting Lenin and others to "substantiate" his "assertions"!!!

Besides Klo's opporytunistic sophistry what else is evidence of his ideological foundations?  It is clear that this opportunist is purely a petty-bourgeois ideologue who places more credibility on serving the interests of the proletariat through the use of imperialism than that of proletarian revolution.  He applauds the imperialists of WW II as being the saviours of the German working-class and shadows that same petty-bourgeois opportunism with imperialism being the saviours of the Afghani working-class although he even denies that Afghanistan has a proletariat!!!  His petty-bourgeois apologetics then rise to the surface when he is confronted on this opportunistic position by stating that once the imperialists have saved the day for the Afghani....(I'm looking for a word since he doesn't believe in there being a proletariat)...downtrodden...they should "call" for the imperialists to leave!  Yep.  That will do it.  Let's simply make a call for the imperialists to leave so the downtrodden can get on with their life!!  Such ridiculous analysis by this opportunist is revealing of his complete bankrupt political line and understanding of why the imperialists are in Afghanistan to begin with.  He seems to think that it is for humanitarian reasons, to rescue the poor downtrodden from the mean Taliban!  He has not nor can he, fathom that the imperialists are there to stay and will be represented by a proxy government that will bow in complete subserviance to the power and interests of the US FASCIST imperialists.  They could not get this cooperation from the Taliban who they created during the CIA and USSR conflict in order to serve the interests of the FASCIST imperialists so now they had to destroy them and create a new surrogate.  He still does not know what the financial assets of this struggle are even though myself, Comrade Charles and a host of other Comrades on different lists he is a member of have clearly provided analysis and information showing the reasons.  All this opportunist can do and does is attempt to negate such contributions.  The question must be asked...Why?  Why does Klo always repudiate and negate everything from the proven historical significance of the proletarian October Revolution to present day fascist imperialism in Afghanistan?  Then we must ask, If he negates proven and documented historical events then why does he try to convince us that he and Lenin are in agreement and that Lenin "substantiates" his assertions?  The answer is revisionism.  He must give the demagogic illusion of masquerading as a Marxist in order to present a convincing lie that the credibility of Marxism-Leninism is a failure and has never been successful.  The answer is that his Trotskyist manuvering is to continue to undermine the Marxist-Leninist movement by misleading and distortion tactics.

I will now quote Lenin from What Is To Be Done?  "As I have said, one may become a demagogue out of sheer political innocense.  But I have shown that you have descended to demagogy, and I will never tire of repeating that demagogues are the worst enemies of the working-class.  The worst enemies, because they arouse base instincts in the masses, because the unenlightened worker is able to recognise his enemies in men who represent themselves, and sometimes, sincerely so, as his friends.  The worst enemies, because in the period of disunity and vacillation, when our movement is just beginning to take shape, nothing is easier than to employ demagogic methods to mislead the masses, who can realise their error only later by experience."

Klo has done exactly what Lenin said disgusts him by degrading the calling of a Marxist revolutionary through his Marxist role playing and false representation of himself as such.  If this opportunist was in "agreement" with Lenin he would recognize that the character of a Marxist organization is determined by its activity and not a display of sophist intellectual superiority.  A part of this activity is how professionally it conducts itself.  A part of this activity is also found in its language of thought communication.  It is quite apparent that KLO has no real understanding of Marxism-Leninism beyond that of pompous intellectualism which is the sum total of his "revolutionary" activity besides the attempts to distort Marxism-Leninsm.

Because we are all geographically separated by even thousands of miles and only linked together through the computer, it is difficult to actually know one another as compared to being together in the same geographical location.  However, as Comrade Javad has previously pointed out, one's political line, one's verbalization will eventually produce the nature of their real self and character.  Some are far more eloquent at concealing their debaseness for a longer period of time.  A persons actions are characterized by their thinking and the way and process of presenting their thinking.  It is during this process of presentation that they prove who they really are.  Anyone can obtain material from other sources and offer it to others and even impress them with "their" knowledge but Klo should not confuse this intellectual capacity with character being defined by original thinking.  This is what determines the real character and Klo has done a fairly eloquent job of disquising his originality with pompous intellectualism and arrogant attempts of superiority over every Comrade that has challenged him by arguments of repudiation based on nothing but petty-bourgeois pedantics and Trotskyist tactics of undermining and distortion and idiotic demands of answers to his petty-bourgeois pedantics.  The only "Marxist" arguement that Klo has presented was a blantant Trotskyist source and then he presents a sophist reversal to this when it is exposed:  "I said I did not see it as a Trot work and I have no intention of changing that comment.  Is that a problem?  if he was a Trot then, it did not come through in that work.  If he became a Trot later, who
cares; that is immaterial to my comment.  So what's the problem?"

The point is that Deutscher was a Trot long before this presentation and Klo knew it even if he blad-face lies about it.  It's a big problem even if he doesn't realize it, which he does because that is the reason that he is trying to worm his way out of this expose.

In conclusion, I must admit to all Comrades and I expect their criticism because it is your duty, I purposely baited Klo into this disgusting jousting match for the very reasons I have outlined above.  I question my tactics as to whether they are correct or a prostitution of professionalism.  However, I will always stand defiantly opposed to opportunism and revisionism.  For me, this arguement is finished with Klo.  I have determined, at least for myself, that Klo is nothing more than an arrogant intellectual opportunist whose only intention is to mislead and distort Marxism-Leninism.  Therefore, I personally view Klo as a demagogue and revisionist, the worst enemie because of his demagoguery.  I do not consider Klo a Comrade and will not bestow the courtesy of this title on him.

Our tasks as Marxist-Leninists is primarily two-fold.  It is to educate the masses to the nature of the contradictions of capitalism, the need for revolution to overthrow capitalism and that the revolutionary theory of Marxism-Leninism is the guide to socialism that can only provide the needs of humankind.  The second task is linked to the first.  We must, at every turn of the struggle, expose and repudiate opportunism.  We must not allow one iota of a concilliatory acceptance of an opportunistic view no matter if it is intentionally espoused or done so through "sheer political innocense."  Revisionism must be smashed or we allow for the credibility of Marxism-Leninism to be continually smeared and blows dealt to it.  We cannot gloss over such a parasitic disease and it is precisely the role of revisionism to disguise itself by wrapping itself in the blanket of Marxism-Leninism.  It is the role of revisionism to masquerade itself as Marxism-Leninism.  And its purpose?  To undermine and destroy the credibility of Marxism-Leninism.  To negate the proven and historical significance of the proletarian October Revolution is revisionism.  To blantantly negate Lenin and Stalin leading a successful proletarian revolution is revisionism.  This is the revisionist position of Klo.  He manifests this revisionism in his pro-imperialist apologetics and sophistry that imperialism helps but then we should "call" for them to leave.  How asanine.  Imperialism will never simply give up their domination and these apologetics serves the purpose of the bourgeoisie in that the opportunist misleads the "unenlightened" to believe that somehow the fascist bourgeoisie and their reactionary system of imperialism will help create a "progressive" condition to allow people to organize against itself.  This is sheer stupidity.  If the bourgeoisie were so benevolent then why have the US working-class been subjected to fascist oppression in the form of COINTELPRO, CHAOS, USA Patriot Act and an enormous list of other fascist programs just in the last 60 years in which Klo's illustrious FDR gave the authority to "Wild Bill" Donovan and others to create the CIA?  

It is because this opportunist knows nothing about Marxism-Leninism.  He knows nothing about fascism.  He knows nothing about how to apply dialectics.  Therefore he can only babble on with petty-bourgeois dogmatics.  He does not know how the "interrelatedness and interconnection" of phemonena realizes the nature and character of that phenomena (dialectics).  Therefore, this opportunist can only relate to things from a mechanical and metaphysical approach.  And we are supposed to believe that Lenin "substantiates" his (Klo) assertions.

It even becomes clear that Klo doesn't know what Trotskyism is, at least that is what he would like us to believe.  Such naive innocense that demands us to put our confidence in his dogmatism.

The rest is for you to decide Comrades.  As for me I have presented my case against this pitiful opportunist and stand by it.  Klo is not a Comrade but a revisionist that seeks to mislead, confuse and distort Marxism-Leninism and those who would sucumb to his sophistry.

Fraternally  Mark Scott