*       From: Yoshie Furuhashi

Thank you for posting Stan's essay.  A couple of comments on some
specific points Stan makes:

On Primary Contradiction

Stan writes: "The Marxist doctrinal belief that the working class
represents the potentially liberatory force within the primary
contradiction - a notion that is, in my view, plain mysticism posing as a
'scientific doctrine' - of bourgeois-proletariat, attempts to override the
demonstrable fact that patriarchy is an older, deeper, and more durable
'contradiction,' that the most turbulent and transformative struggles of the
20th Century, while often under the leadership of Marixists, had a primarily
national character, and that they were more often carried out by
majority-masses of peasants, not proletarians."

^^^^^

CB; On this issue, Stan has some essays on his blog on why the left should
drop Engels on gender.

However, it is already the thesis of Marxism, by Engels' book _The Origin of
the Family, Private Property and the State_, that patriarchy is an older
contradiction than the class contradictions of _capitalism_, as the private
property that arises in a complex with the patriarchal family that Engels
refers to is _not_ capitalism, but slavery, of course. Engels writes of the
origin of the male supremacist family long before capitalism arises.

Marxism is rich in analyses that argue that the "patriarchal" contradiction
changes with the change in the form of private property. Clara Zetkin and
others analyze how the oppression of women changes with the rise of
capitalism.

So, Stan weakens his analysis by ditching classic Marxist theory in this
regard. I wrote this to Stan on his blog a while ago.

Also, Stan seems not to have noticed that Marxist-Leninists, with their
symbol of the hammer and sickle, were quite aware that poor peasants and
cross class alliances of the masses of working people (not just
proletarians) were critical in all the revolutions of the twentieth century.
Lenin, Mao, Ho et al. weren't quite as dead in the head as Stan would have
one think. They didn't accidently lead the successes by integrating workers
and peasants.

Reply via email to