In a message dated 12/28/2010 4:29:29 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, mark1scot...@yahoo.com writes:
Scott writes: "Any reader will notice that LRNA's main focus has been on the "reform" tactics in order to correctly identify with the masses, however, if one has had the opportunity as I have, to be practically involved with LRNA they will notice the practical reality of their "line of march". This "line of march" has developed into the recognition that US capitalism along with its entrenched political parties of Republican and Democrat are no longer progressive. This recognition more than implies that the working-class can no longer have a vested interest in either political party. The class struggle is not merely taking an interest in reforming capitalism because capitalism is beyond being reformed. It is moribund. It is a dead social system that can no longer give "reforms" or concessions to the working-class as the only life that is left in US capitalism is its struggle with itself to preserve for as long as possible the privilege of the ruling-class which is itself rapidly diminishing." Comment The League conception and concrete meaning of "reform" IS NOT A CONCEPT OF TACTICS OR STRATEGY, but rather a concept of the dialectic of change in a social system or mode of production. A mode of production passes through various quantitative boundaries of development. These quantitative boundaries of development or "quantitative junctures" reform the system without changing or calling into question the existence of the property relations, because expansion of the means of production remains compatible with the property relations. It is only at a "certain stage of their development, the material productive forces of society come in conflict with the existing relations of production . . . Then begins an epoch of social revolution." (Marx) In the article presented the example used is the mechanization of agriculture and its social consequence for the struggle of the African American in particular. Mechanization of agriculture was compatible with bourgeois property and thus the system was reformed. Specifically, the system that was the social organization agriculture. As the process of "reform of the system" the sharecropper as a historically concrete class at the base of Southern agriculture was liquidated from history. Other aspects of system wide reformulation of relations within and between classes were the passage of the Voting Rights Act, Fair Housing legislation and the growth of government agencies mediating relations. There was also the growth of various Civil Rights organizations functioning as organs of mediation between capital and labor. The system was reformed. Marx actually sums up the general law of reform of the system. "No social order ever perishes before all the productive forces for which there is room in it have developed; and new, higher relations of production never appear before the material conditions of their existence have matured in the womb of the old society itself." LRNA states the very same thing in the article "Struggle for reform to make revolution possible." "LRNA has often stated that there are no reforms left in capitalism. We say that because there can be no further development of the electro-mechanical means of production, which is the basis for reform under capital. The tools, the means of production, are in a qualitative leap from electro- mechanics to electronics. We are in an economic revolution. We are at the end of an epoch and any further social reform will come as a result of social revolution that restructures society to become compatible with the new electronic labor-replacing means of production." II. Nor is the meaning of reform by LRNA articulated as an issue of tactics deployed to correctly identify with the masses. Identifying with the "masses," which means a section of the proletariat and its leaders in motion is a matter of how an organization implements a "line of compromise." A line of compromise allows an organization of revolutionaries to work WITHIN a distinct beachhead in the class struggle with the objective of fighting to achieve the "groups" stated goals while winning the leaders of the proletariat to the cause of communism. Communists cannot stand outside the various beachheads of conflict. Working within the trade unions or hospitals or schools or for welfare reform is by definition ones "line of compromise" because of the partial character of the demands of these different struggles. If ones work is within the welfare reform movement or within the single payer health care movement, you must talk about the issues and wage the most determined struggle to keep the struggle on its path of conflict with capital. A line of compromise is not an organizations "line of march." Karl Marx and Engels coined the concept "line of march" in the Communist Manifesto. "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. 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." (emphasis added) LRNA writes: "The line of march of today's revolutionary process began with the introduction of qualitatively new electronic robotic means of production in industry and manufacturing, replacing human labor in production. This causes a break in capitalism's essential relationship between labor and capital, signaling the end of capitalism, and sets in motion the forces that can transform society." (Line of March: Map to a new society September.2010.Vol20.Ed5 This article originated in Rally, Comrades!) That is to say the "line of march" is along the path of quantitative development and qualitative changes in the means of production. When the system can be reformed, as was the case in 1928, 1936, and 1955 the line of march was along the path of reform of the system because there is no other game in town. Communists may have wanted proletarian revolution in 1928 or 1955 but such was not possible in America or anywhere else at the front curve of industrial revolution/capital development. III. One is of course entitled to their interpretation. LRNA and Rally Comrades are pretty exacting in their description of the social process. Scott writes: "Therefore, LRNA also recognizes the absolute need for and the present development of US styled fascism to preserve for as long as possible their dying social system. In recognizing this process of development of US fascism the recognition of the need for revolution is also realized. It is only through revolution that society can be restructured to benefit the needs of all workers but this realization of the need for revolution, this revolutionary theory, must be brought from the outside by the vanguard element of Marxist revolutionaries. No one, to include myself, denies that revolution is a process and no where have I ever indicated that the armed struggle of socialist revolution supersedes any stage of development of socialist revolution." (end quote) Everyone within Marxism agrees that social revolution is a process of new means of production entering into conflict and antagonism with static "social relations of production" and their underlying private property content. On the issue of fascism LRNA DOES NOT STATE THAT "the present development of US styled fascism (IS) to preserve for as long as possible their (BOURGEOIS) dying social system." Rally Comrades states that the goal of the fascist movement today is destruction of "the system" - the capitalist economic system, and preservation of private property in a new form. Here is how Rally writes this: "On the contrary those that make up the fascist movement want to take the country into the twenty-first century organized around the new tools of production, electronics. These individuals have a vision of reconstructing America. As the productive relations between workers and capitalists are torn asunder, they see the writing on the wall. Their goal is to preserve private property, even if it's at the expense of the capitalist economic system. As the electronic revolution matures, the capitalist is becoming as outdated as the worker. This is the crux of the social turmoil going on worldwide. The globe is caught in the throes of a social revolution." (Excerpted from Political Report of the LRNA Standing Committee, March 2009) _http://www.lrna.org/2-pt/articles/v19ed3art5.html_ (http://www.lrna.org/2-pt/articles/v19ed3art5.html) One does not have to agree with the above proposition and agreement is not a condition for membership in LRNA. However, fascism today - according to LRNA, seeks to destroy the system of bourgeois private property and replace it with a new form of private property not anchored in the wage labor form, or specifically the creation of surplus value. That is to say, private property or the social power of private wealth accumulation, without capitalism. The ruling class as ruling class is not fighting for a fascist resolution of the antagonism between new means of production and the old bourgeois relations AS THE MEANS to preserve bourgeois private property . . . . according to LRNA. In the article "Fascism: Unity between the state and the corporations to protect private property" March 2009 Rally Comrades write: "Under today's qualitatively new conditions fascism represents the bourgeoisie's struggle to align the superstructure with the changing nature of private property relations. Fascism today seeks to facilitate a whole new world order based on private property without capitalism." (end quote) Here is the entire context of the above quote: "Today, fascism is arising under qualitatively different conditions. As the economy shifts from industrial to electronic production, the economic base of current bourgeois-democratic state-forms is eroding. We are facing nothing less than an attempt by the ruling class to wholly reshape the state and society to adapt to new economic conditions so that they can continue their rule. No longer is the "most reactionary, most chauvinist, and most imperialist" section of the capitalist class the class base of fascism, but the entire bourgeoisie. The centralization and integration of the leading capitalist corporations and the global and fundamental nature of the current transition mean that the owning class shares a common interest in its objective need for a fascist resolution to this crisis. Under today's qualitatively new conditions fascism represents the bourgeoisie's struggle to align the superstructure with the changing nature of private property relations. Fascism today seeks to facilitate a whole new world order based on private property without capitalism." (end quote) Waistline. _______________________________________________ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list Marxist-Leninist-List@lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
