Re: AW: [MLL]question
Sven Buttler wrote: Klo, You can contact cde Stan at [EMAIL PROTECTED] He obviously left us and posts a lot on Mark Jones's Crashlist. A pity, isn't it? Sven Sure is and thanks for the information. Klo -- Can anyone give me the address of bon moun? Thank you, Klo ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
Re: [MLL]Re: [downwithcapitalism] FW: Moldovan Congress confirms communism
Partija rada wrote: To me it looks like that we would have a new "communist" government like that one of Milosevic. I hope that I get wrong picture, but...Milan That was the warning I sent out and time will tell. The changes I contend are a MUST are fundamental not superficialities. There could be a picture of Lenin behind the speaker that is 100 feet tall and that would by no means solidify their credentials or program. And I all but ignore labels. I am far more interested in what parties do than what they say, the platform they run on, or the name they adopt for their organization. The essence of my message was that there is no way they can avoid the "E" word and expect to accomplish anything of significance. They must not only nationalize but do it WITHOUT COMPENSATION and that is EXPROPRIATION. There is another "E" word that is its equivalent, "Emancipation." Moldova is not a poor country; it's people are poor. The problem is that all the wealth that matters is in the hands of a few. For the cause, Klo -Original Message- From: KloMcKinsey [EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: MLLlist [EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: 27 April, 2001 4:51 AM Subject: [MLL]Re: [downwithcapitalism] FW: Moldovan Congress confirms communism Downwithcapitalism wrote: MD News. 24 April 2001. Moldova's Communist Leadership Believes in Perspectives of Communism. The Moldova's ruling Communist Party (MCP) held its IV (XXI) ordinary congress past Saturday and Sunday which was attended by over 400 delegates and about 800 guests. The forum re-elected Moldovan President Vladimir Voronin as MCP Chairman, andparliamentary MCP faction leader Victor Stepaniuk as Secretary of the MCP Political Executive Committee. The congress was attended by communist party delegations from the Russian Federation, Ukraine, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Georgia, Belarus, Cuba, Slovakia, Greece, Portugal, Cyprus, Yugoslavia, Vietnam, China, Romania, Spain, North Korea, and Turkey, as well as from Transnistria. To the standing ovation by delegates and guests, party leader Vladimir Voronin appeared at the podium against the background of a gigantic portrait of Lenin, and made a 1.5 hour report in which he spoke, in particular, about "the deadlock of capitalism" and "revival of socialism". "The capitalist way of development is a way to a deadlock", he stated, and referred, as an argument, to the aggravating standoff between a dozen and a half developed nations and dozens of poor countries. "These contradictions have become particularly sharp after the demise of the former Soviet Union", he said. He believes the only reasonable alternative to such a standoff is the socialist way of development, "whose temporary defeat only proves this truth". Broken ties with the East, in particular with the Russian Federation, is viewed by Vladimir Voronin as the chief reason of the economic and social hardships being suffered by the Moldovan people. The party leader indicated the historic heritage left to the Communist Party by "democratic reformers": a fall in GDP by 3-fold, a complete de-industrialization of the national economy, a $1.5 billion external debt, three-quarters of the population living below the subsistence level, hundreds of thousand Moldovans earning their living abroad. "The Right forces deliberately ruined Moldova's traditional ties with Russia and the CIS, thus turning the vector of the country's external policy", said the MCP leader. "The shadowy economy has drawn under its roof over a half of the GDP size". "Over last 10 years, [pro-Romania] unionist forces -- which have never regarded Moldova as a sovereign state but only as a province of the neighbor country -- have been acting driven by 'the worse - the better' principle. He emphasized that the MCP's crucial achievement since its III Congress was "the democratic overthrow of the anti-popular power regime". "History has ruled so that Moldova has become the first of all European states where Communists are back at power. The MCP's historic mission is to prove to the world: the Communist idea, the Communist movement have most favorable historic perspectives", he said. Among MCP's drawbacks the leader mentioned a poor work with the youth and insufficiently active party construction. Currently the MCP has 840 basic party organizations functioning across the country, whereas the objective was to have organizations in each of Moldova's 1.5 thousand cities, towns and villages. "So, this question remains on the agenda. It is necessary to further struggle for people's minds", he said. During the whole congress, the word 'privatization' was only once mentioned in a positive sense -- when the auditing commission reported that a portion of the party budget was used for privatizing the MCP office and newspaper. Voronin said t
[MLL]question
Can anyone give me the address of bon moun? Thank you, Klo ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
Re: [MLL]Re: [downwithcapitalism] FW: Moldovan Congress confirms communism
Javad Eskandarpour wrote: Comrade Klo, A good Commentary. Javad Thanks for your most gracious compliment, Javad. And I might note that I have been impressed with some of the comments you have made in some posts lately. You might want to venture over to the downwithcapitalism list and view some of its postings, as it resembles MLL. That is where I got the article. Stoller is there, as is Bill Howard, who has been posting there a lot lately. I am on both. It does have some anarchists and crypto-Trots, however. And it does have some criticism of Stalin. Lately I have been in a running debate over Stalin with Stoller. Usually Stoller's commentaries are pretty good, but he has a mind-bloc when it comes to Stalin because of having been taken in by a lot of bourgeois propaganda. Fraternally, Klo From Klo: This post is replete with good news and progressive steps, but, unfortunately, avoids either intentionally or unintentionally, the central question. It's the question that people viewing themselves as Marxists or Communists or Leninists throughout the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe have been avoiding. It's the question upon which all others reside, namely, who owns or controls the basic means of production, distribution and exchange. Who owns the factories, mines, mills, fields, crops, lands, machinery, tools, forests, and all other productive forces within Moldova? That is the critical issue, because that will ultimately determine what policies will be instituted and followed and who will benefit. No amount of rhetoric, singing, pictures, regalia, partying, bravado, unity, combative speaking, grandiloquent oratory, or threats will substitute for controlling that which really matters. When all is said and done, and we have repeatedly seen similar scenarios played out in other countries, the fact remains that they are avoiding the E word like the plague. No matter how you look at the scene or how you wish to approach the problems, there is no avoiding the ultimate requirement--nationalization without compensation which is EXPROPRIATION. THAT IS MANDATORY. YOU ABSOLUTELY MUST GET YOUR HANDS ON THE MONEY AND THAT WHICH PRODUCES THE WEALTH. I certainly wish them well but if they don't confront this most important of all issues head-on, all else is for nought. If they don't face this central fact, the Moldovan people will be highly disappointed in the Communists of Moldova, turn their backs on socialism and Marxism, and adopt the prevailing attitude of so many in Eastern Europe. For the cause, Klo ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
[MLL]Re: [downwithcapitalism] FW: Moldovan Congress confirms communism
Downwithcapitalism wrote: MD News. 24 April 2001. Moldova's Communist Leadership Believes in Perspectives of Communism. The Moldova's ruling Communist Party (MCP) held its IV (XXI) ordinary congress past Saturday and Sunday which was attended by over 400 delegates and about 800 guests. The forum re-elected Moldovan President Vladimir Voronin as MCP Chairman, andparliamentary MCP faction leader Victor Stepaniuk as Secretary of the MCP Political Executive Committee. The congress was attended by communist party delegations from the Russian Federation, Ukraine, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Georgia, Belarus, Cuba, Slovakia, Greece, Portugal, Cyprus, Yugoslavia, Vietnam, China, Romania, Spain, North Korea, and Turkey, as well as from Transnistria. To the standing ovation by delegates and guests, party leader Vladimir Voronin appeared at the podium against the background of a gigantic portrait of Lenin, and made a 1.5 hour report in which he spoke, in particular, about "the deadlock of capitalism" and "revival of socialism". "The capitalist way of development is a way to a deadlock", he stated, and referred, as an argument, to the aggravating standoff between a dozen and a half developed nations and dozens of poor countries. "These contradictions have become particularly sharp after the demise of the former Soviet Union", he said. He believes the only reasonable alternative to such a standoff is the socialist way of development, "whose temporary defeat only proves this truth". Broken ties with the East, in particular with the Russian Federation, is viewed by Vladimir Voronin as the chief reason of the economic and social hardships being suffered by the Moldovan people. The party leader indicated the historic heritage left to the Communist Party by "democratic reformers": a fall in GDP by 3-fold, a complete de-industrialization of the national economy, a $1.5 billion external debt, three-quarters of the population living below the subsistence level, hundreds of thousand Moldovans earning their living abroad. "The Right forces deliberately ruined Moldova's traditional ties with Russia and the CIS, thus turning the vector of the country's external policy", said the MCP leader. "The shadowy economy has drawn under its roof over a half of the GDP size". "Over last 10 years, [pro-Romania] unionist forces -- which have never regarded Moldova as a sovereign state but only as a province of the neighbor country -- have been acting driven by 'the worse - the better' principle. He emphasized that the MCP's crucial achievement since its III Congress was "the democratic overthrow of the anti-popular power regime". "History has ruled so that Moldova has become the first of all European states where Communists are back at power. The MCP's historic mission is to prove to the world: the Communist idea, the Communist movement have most favorable historic perspectives", he said. Among MCP's drawbacks the leader mentioned a poor work with the youth and insufficiently active party construction. Currently the MCP has 840 basic party organizations functioning across the country, whereas the objective was to have organizations in each of Moldova's 1.5 thousand cities, towns and villages. "So, this question remains on the agenda. It is necessary to further struggle for people's minds", he said. During the whole congress, the word 'privatization' was only once mentioned in a positive sense -- when the auditing commission reported that a portion of the party budget was used for privatizing the MCP office and newspaper. Voronin said the party's main objectives are rehabilitation of economy, improving the population's life, society consolidation, reforming of the country management, Transnistrian conflict solution, pragmatic foreign policy. He confirmed the Communists recognize the equality of all property forms. For the first indulgences to be done by the Communist Party will be the income tax lowering, and raising of pensions and salaries proportionally to the minimal consumer basket cost. Presently, the average wage is Moldova constitutes only 30 percent of the subsistence level sum. Among social priorities the Communists indicate the need to make secondary and higher education as well as health care free of charge. "It is essential to return people's trust in power. We must be wise managers and must not be thieves. This must apply to everyone -- from the President to the last village mayor". These words caused delegates' prolonged, loud applauses. The Communists are not ruling out that at the first stage of work in all state power structures they will have "to restore order through the dictatorship of law... The Communist Party is supposed to bring to a logical end the parliamentary system building in Moldova as the most suitable model of a democratic society". "Synonymously confirming all the Moldova's international accords and commitments in relations with other countries, we at the same time must place more emphasis on pragmatism in our
[MLL]No subject was specified.
I was sent this. Can you imagine working for an organization that has a little more than 500 employees and has the following statistics: 1. 29 of the employees have been accused of spousal abuse at this work place. 2. 7 have been arrested for fraud. 3. 19 have been accused of writing bad checks. 4. 117 have directly or indirectly bankrupted at least 2 businesses. 5. 3 have done time for assault. 6. 71 cannot get a credit card due to bad credit. 7. 14 have been arrested on drug-related charges. 8. 8 have been arrested for shoplifting. 9. 21 are currently defendants in lawsuits. 10. 84 have been arrested for drunk driving in the last year. Can you guess which organization this is? Give up yet? It's the 535 members of the United States Congress. The same group that passes out hundreds of new laws each year designed to keep the rest of us in line. ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
Re: [MLL]Zionism is Fascism!
Partija rada wrote: -Original Message- From: KloMcKinsey Date: 16 April, 2001 1:50 PM My reply, Leaving aside his occasionally convoluted terminology Javad's arguments are considerably more accurate in this matter than those of his critics. In simple terms: Anti-Zionism, which Marxists support, does not equal anti-Semitism, which Marxists oppose. All Zionists are not Jews and all Jews are not Zionists by any means. The attempt to squelch opposition to Zionism by labeling its opponents as anti-Semitic is a capitalist ruse that has been practiced for years and is no more valid now than the first time its horrific head emerged from the muck. Palestinians who are opposed to the Zionist movement but not Judaism have been repeatedly and erroneously branded anti-Semitic for propaganda purposes. Not without good reason did the United Nations pass a resolution branding Zionism as racism. For the cause, Klo Short, sharp, shock! Congratulations Klo. You hit the target better than we do. Milan Thank you Milan. Your kind comments are most appreciated. Incidentally, I think the moderators need to straighten out this posting problem with MLL ASAP. It can not help but diminish the number of participants and postings. Getting a rejected message saying SUSPICIOUS HEADER makes me feel like someone thinks I am a spy or enemy agent. Needless to say, I don't like it. The lackluster activity here has caused me to drift to another list which is not as good but is quite active called [EMAIL PROTECTED] By the way, for those who are interested, two months ago the Communist Party USA started its own pre-convention discussion list at [EMAIL PROTECTED] Looks like Yahoo is really popular these days. I joined both and am now buried in emails. For the cause, Klo PS. I just got word that the CPUSA is limiting the topics that can be discussed. ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
[MLL][Fwd: [downwithcapitalism] FW: Castro speech from 105th conference]
Another good speech by Fidel. Granma. 10 April 2001. We are not interested in the votes against the blockade of those who hypocritically support the arguments with which the empire attempts to justify its crimes. Speech given by Fidel Castro Ruz at the Plenary Session of the 105th Conference of the Inter-Parliamentary Union, held in the International Conference Center, Havana, 5 April 2001. Excerpts. Madame President and other members of the Presidency; Distinguished Parliamentarians: When I spoke at the 68th Inter-Parliamentary Conference in 1981, after mentioning a number of figures and statistics that illustrated the growing gap separating the developed, wealthy world from the countries that were formerly its colonies and domains, victims of relentless plunder for centuries, I made a statement that might have seemed excessive: If the present is tragic, the future looks dismal. Let nobody try to fool or confuse us with the new terminology spawned by the hypocritical propaganda of specialists in deception and lies, working in the service of those who have subjected humanity to an increasingly unequal and unfair economic and political order, one that is completely devoid of solidarity or democracy or even an iota of respect for the minimum rights owed to human beings. I was not exaggerating when I made that statement. The Third Worlds foreign debt, which totaled some 500 billion dollars in 1981, had reached 2.1 trillion dollars in the year 2000. The share corresponding to Latin America was 255.188 billion dollars in 1981; by 2000, it was 750.855 billion. The servicing of the Third World debt, which amounted to 44.2 billion USD in 1981, had reached 347.4 billion USD in 2000. The per capita gross national product (GDP) in the developed countries was 8,070 USD in 1978. Twenty years later, in 1998, per capita GDP in those countries had grown to 25,870 USD. In the meantime, the per capita GDP in the countries with the lowest incomes, which was 200 USD in 1978, had risen to only 530 USD by the year 1998. The abysmal gap had grown even wider. The number of undernourished people, almost all of whom live in Third World countries, rose from 570 million in 1981 to 800 million in 2000. The number of unemployed grew from 1.103 billion in 1981 to 1.6 billion in 2000. Today, the wealthiest 20% of the worlds population accounts for 86% of all spending on private consumption, while the poorest 20% accounts for only 1.3%. In the wealthy countries, per capita electricity consumption is 10 times higher than in all the poor countries combined. According to United Nations figures, in 1960 the income of 20% of the world population living in the wealthiest nations was 30 times that of the poorest nations; by 1997 it was 74 times greater. Studies carried out by the FAO between 1987 and 1998 reveal that two out of every five children in the underdeveloped world suffer from growth retardation, while one out of every three is underweight for his or her age. There are 1.3 billion poor people in the Third World, that is, one out of every three lives in poverty. The World Bank, in its latest report on poverty, predicts that the number of people living in absolute poverty could reach 1.5 billion as the new millennium begins. The wealthiest 25% of the worlds population consumes 45% of all meat and fish; the poorest 25% consumes only 5%. In sub-Saharan Africa, infant mortality rate is 107 per 1000 live births during the first year of life, and 173 per thousand live births before the age of five. In South Asia, the rates are 76 and 114, respectively. In the case of Latin America, according to UNICEF, infant mortality before the age of five is 39 per 1000 live births. More than 800 million adults remain illiterate. More than 130 million school-age children are growing up without access to basic education. The truth, which cannot be hidden, is that there are currently over 800 million people suffering chronic hunger while lacking access to health care services, which is why it is estimated that 507 million people living in the Third World today will not live past 40 years of age. South of the Sahara, almost 30% of the population will die before they are 40. In 1981, climate change was seldom mentioned, and very few people had ever even heard the word AIDS. Today these are two harrowing threats that have been added to the calamities already mentioned. In 1981, the world population had surpassed four billion; 75% of them living in Third World countries. Today, in 2001, there are already more than 6.1 billion of us on the planet. In just 20 years, the world population grew by 1.7 billion, more than it had grown since the emergence of the human species until the beginning of the 20th century. In short, the world income share of the countries that now constitute the Third World has shrunk so much that a century and a half ago it was 56%, while today it is only 15%. This is truly a peculiar way of expressing the
Re: [MLL]another list
"Charles F. Moreira" wrote: Comrades, Klo wrote:- Charles, Please don't misunderstand what I meant. I am certainly not suggesting people leave the MLL as it is the best list I have found. I was merely suggesting that people may want to be on both. But if someone's time is limited I would certainly recommend the MLL first. Hopefully it will stay active for the duration. The best, Klo Sorry if I gave the impression that I misunderstood you. I just wanted to highlight that the MLL is still operational, though some messages still get held up of a moderator to approve due to this "suspiscious header" thing. Anyway. I personally prefer sticking with Workers World, since I believe they will eventually be up again. I don't have too much confidence that free Wen sites like offered by Yahoo will be around for very long. The laws of capitalism abhors freebies, especially when they can't earn enough side revenue (ie. advertisements) from it. The only other thing is I'm concerned why this list has gone so quiet, while lists like DownWithCapitalism are so active. Fraternally Charles To all participants on MLL. Charles, Bill and I have joined and been posting on another list that you might want to consider. I am not vouching for its credentials because I have not been on it very long and I have not read comments from some participants, but so far it has looked promising. The address is: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fraternally, Klo Good question. The downwithcapitalism swamps me with messages. Fraternally Klo ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
[MLL]another list
To all participants on MLL. Charles, Bill and I have joined and been posting on another list that you might want to consider. I am not vouching for its credentials because I have not been on it very long and I have not read comments from some participants, but so far it has looked promising. The address is: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fraternally, Klo
Re: [MLL]another list
"Charles F. Moreira" wrote: Comrades, The Marxist-Leninist list is still active and we can continue discussions here. Fraternally Charles Charles, Please don't misunderstand what I meant. I am certainly not suggesting people leave the MLL as it is the best list I have found. I was merely suggesting that people may want to be on both. But if someone's time is limited I would certainly recommend the MLL first. Hopefully it will stay active for the duration. The best, Klo To all participants on MLL. Charles, Bill and I have joined and been posting on another list that you might want to consider. I am not vouching for its credentials because I have not been on it very long and I have not read comments from some participants, but so far it has looked promising. The address is: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fraternally, Klo ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
[MLL]Re: [downwithcapitalism] Re: anarchism and the working class
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Mr. Stoller brought up the point that anarchism is a movement started by the bourgeoisie artisans. I'll grant him that, but so was communism. Engels was a middle class man and Karl Marx was hardly a proletariat. Also, trade unions were started by artisans. (Snip) No one is born a communist (yet). My reply, No one is born a communist?? Can't agree. Exactly the opposite is true. That is how they are born and only through acculturation and indoctrination are they turned into self-centered, egotistical, property grabbing, private owners. The original state of humanity was primitive communal society and only later, with the arrival of a surplus of production and the opportunity for exploitation, did private ownership make an appearance. Look at the Indians of North America before the arrival of the European capitalists. Virtually every society was organized along primitive communal lines with no police forces, no jails, no courts, no titles, no deeds, no claims, no stocks, no bonds, no loans, no land grabs, no fences, no walls, and no lying. The contention that "white man speak with forked tongue" wasn't just a clever aphorism. It was a fact. The mentality of "what is mine is mine and what is yours should be mine" simply didn't exist. Europeans, primarily explorers financed by capitalists seeking added wealth, were shocked when they first contacted the native tribes of Africa, the Amazon, and the Pacific Islands, for example. To them the natives were so simple, so honest, so vulnerable, so trusting, so considerate, etc. In other words, the latter displayed exactly the qualities that were lacking in the societies dominated by private ownership. I would STRONGLY recommend that you read my book entitled THE RELEVANCE OF MARXISM on my website which has a substantive discussion of this very issue near the beginning. The world's capitalists have spent an absolute fortune in time and money trying to convince humanity that the private ownership societies of slavery, feudalism, and above all, capitalism, are the natural state of man when they are anything but. They are an outgrowth, a derivative, and by no means represent the natural state of man. I am always both amused and saddened when I see capitalist movies portray the "cave man" as a self-centered, lustful, pugnacious, rapacious beast when the capitalists are only looking in a mirror as they construct their myths. For the cause, Klo PS. The site address for my book is: http://my.ohio.voyager.net/~klomckin
[MLL]Re: [downwithcapitalism] FW: Analysis: Communists Return to Power inMoldova
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Monthly Review Current Commentary. 13 March 2001. Communists Return
to
Power in Moldova: Hope for a Communist Democracy in the Former
Soviet
Union? Excerpts.
The February 25, 2001 electoral victory of the Moldovan Communist
party
marked the first return to power of a Communist party in any of
the
sovereign fragments of the Former Soviet Union ("FSU"). If you
have left
wing politics and can use a dose of optimism, this event is a positive
portent forat lastan end to the Mafia capitalist regimes of
"democratic reform" that constitute the glory of the U.S. victory
in the
cold war. The most interesting question is not what the Moldovan
Communists can achieve in their sovereign ministate, but what can
be
hoped to happen as a result in the rest of the FSU community.
... [W]ere you mistakenly to believe the Moscow English language
press
corps, you would have concluded that these various oppositional
Communist parties are ever in the process of disappearing. It is
endlessly, and incorrectly, repeated that these CPs are supported
entirely by old poor people, and it is indeed undeniable that old
poor
people are everywhere in the FSU dying at rates that in the past
were
attained only in times of war, plague and famine. But the Russian
party
has maintained its core of support at between a quarter and a third
of
the population, and the Ukrainian party has been growing stronger.
In
fact, support for these parties is broad based and persistent,
and the
officially unthinkable notion must be entertained that these
oppositional Communists could return to power in the FSU with majority
support.
It's therefore of great interest that on February 25, 2001, the
oppositional Communist party of Moldova won control of the government
of
the Republic by a decisive victory in an undeniably free, democratic,
etc. etc. election. Unlike U.S. president Bush II, the Moldovan
Communist party actually won more votes than their main opponent;
indeed, it even won a majority of all votes cast. No other oppositional
Communist party in the FSU has yet achieved this result; it's an
interesting "first."
... Moldova joined the Soviet Union in 1940, and by the end of World
War
II its population was decimated and the little that had been previously
achieved in the way of industry was totally destroyed. As part
of the
Soviet Union, Moldova underwent rapid development of infrastructure,
agriculture and industry. Electric power became universal, where
previously it had reached only the heart of the largest cities.
Rapid
economic development depended on the supply of raw materials and
finished products from the rest of the Soviet Union: coal, gas,
petroleum, iron steel, motor vehicles, fertilizers, cotton
and woolen
textiles, lumber and paper. In turn, Moldova supplied fruit, wine,
canned goods, refrigerators, washing machines, silk fabrics and
knitted
goods, and "hi tech" industry and science for the Soviet space
and
maritime programs.
The demolition of the USSR severed these links, crucial for the
metabolism of both Moldovan industry and agriculture, which withered.
By
2001 industrial production in Moldova was a third of that of 1991.
... The election of February 25 has given the Western intelligence
agencies a new and bothersome task; it will now be necessary to
undertake to co-opt, or failing that destabilize and subvert, a
democratically elected Communist government of a sovereign segment
of
the FSU. Because there is a sense in which the FSU remains a community,
a territory that threatens to break with the "reform" program poses
a
significant danger to the shining achievements of the U.S. victory
in
the cold war.
... Meanwhile the sole significant political organization
throughout
the Ukraine is the Ukrainian Communist Party, which has been growing
steadily in strength and which probably won the last elections
but for
Kuchma's massive electoral fraud.
... What may be the most important change resulting from February
25 is
that the national Moldovan television is now under the control
of the
Moldovan Communists, who have openly said that they shall end the
media
blockade of left wing and communist points of view... The Ukrainian
Communist Party, which has grown into a major force despite a total
media blackout, now may finally have a media window.
My reply,
Although this is certainly good
news, one must take certain facts into consideration and take certain facts
into consideration. What I said in regard to the Communist Party
victory in Mongolia is applicable here as well. I stated,
This kind of electoral victory must be viewed very critically, without
an elevation of hopes and dreams, as it will more than likely result in
a replay of what has occurred many times in Eastern Europe in recent years.
The scenario begins with the undermining and overthrow of socialism by
some revisionist traitors. That, of course, is followed by a deluge
of changes in order to institute capitalism. This, in turn, results
in a drastic
Re: [MLL]Re: [downwithcapitalism] FW: Analysis: Communists Return to Power in Moldova
Harry Steele wrote: While there is undoubtedly some truth in what Comrade Klo says in his comments on the Moldova election victory, I must say I found the tone rather dismissive and lacking in a broader view of the struggles underway in former socialist countries. There is a fundamental question here about the possibility or otherwise of what could be termed halting the counter-revolution. After the best part of a decade of actually existing capitalism the people of Moldova have turned to the Communist Party to deal with the problems they have faced. There are increasing signs that a similar process is underway in Ukraine and also to some extent in Russia, so the question posed takes on some significance. The communists in the former Soviet republics tend to express a pro-Soviet position in that they favour greater economic and political ties with Russia ? some movement back towards union. Their positions tend to favour a slowing down of reforms and in some cases a halt to privatisation and return to state managed economies. I am not aware of the full position of the Moldovian communists with regard to the questions of capitalist economic reforms, but I note that the day after they were elected they were at pains to reassure international financial organisations that they intended to continue with reforms. My reply, Bingo. Now you are on target. That's a major part of what I am talking about. However it is too easy to use such statements to dismiss them as social democrats, opportunists etc as Klo does. My reply, I did not dismiss them as anything "yet." I said be wary and don't get your hopes up. We have been down this path many times in the past decade. The people have elected them to govern in a situation of economic and social crisis ? the fact that the people turn to Communists, who we were told were hated and despised and had been cast out forever should encourage us. The country they have been asked to govern is utterly dependent on foreign loans and credits as a result of the counter-revolution. Without such resources they will be unable to deliver even the most minimal of demands of workers and other strata in Moldova. My reply, False. Were they to expropriate without compensation the means of production, distribution, and exchange they would not need to go begging to anyone. The former traitorous leadership sold it all for a pittance; therefore, the masses should be able to take it back for a pittance. Until you get your hands on the wealth you can forget about doing anything significant. What in this situation is a Communist Party to do? My reply, I just answered that. It would, in my opinion, be an ultra-left folly, for communists in a small, dependent, poor country such as Moldova, to announce to the IMF and the World Bank that they have rejected wholesale the programme of reforms that credits and loans have been linked to. My reply, It would be folly to think they are going to accomplish anything worth talking about if they did not expropriate wholesale and reject the IMF and World Bank in masse. Yours is a prescription for a march toward the quicksand bog. The tap would be turned off and the Moldovian people would pay the price and the Communists would never be forgiven. My reply, Not with my program. They will pay the price in spades if they think the IMF and the World Bank are going to save the day. Of that there can be no doubt. You sound like Gorby. Capitalism is not going to save anyone or any nation. Trust me! In the absence of a strong socialist camp to back up Moldova, the communists have no choice but to the best for their class, within the limited options they are given in current conditions. My reply, That is a prescription for more degradation and disintegration. Communist parties were not formed to govern in such situations. Most parties were formed in the wake of October and they expected to come to power with the might of the Soviet Union and then later Peoples China alongside them. That is no longer the case. My reply, So you recommend surrender and capitulation. Said like a real "Marxist-Leninist." The South African comrades Klo refers to had hoped to come to power in an era when the Soviet Union would have been a strong ally and could have assisted them to develop on a non-capitalist road as happened in other African and other liberated countries. My reply, False. That was never Mandela's program. He's a nationalist but not a Marxist. That did not happen. Liberation in South Africa came in an era of historic defeat and massive setbacks for the international communist movement. So the South African comrades have had to deal
Re: [MLL]Test
Partija rada wrote: -Original Message- From: Charles F. Moreira Date: 26 March, 2001 9:38 AM Subject: Re: [MLL]Test Klo, Thanks for your assessment and the commentary by Barry Stoller which is interesting and which I'll have to study in greater detail later. Your assessment is correct. It has, indeed, drifted into a news posting list. Where are Jim Hillier, Sven, bon moun, and many others? Are they still with us? With regards discussions on this list, I've been wondering whether we should have discussions dealing with contemporary issues like the one you, Steele and Stoller are discussing with references back to the classics and contemporary writings? Have we been discussing theoretical and historical issues in a vacuum which results in people quickly losing interest in continuing the thread of the discussion? On the other hand, is this a common occurrence on most lists, since I haven't received anything from the Cuba Si list since the 22nd, though activity on the Stalinskaya list appears to be picking up? Could a lack of list activity be because with the current slowdown in the economy, collapse of dotcom companies, retrenchments in the information technology and Internet industries, people simply have less time to spend on lists like this? Any ideas?? Charles I have an idea. Do you people can imagine how it looks like to non-speaking English to read long discussions? I do not say that we do not need discussions. I just say that is hard for most of us to participate on the list on the way which we would like just because English is not our language. Milan Milan. You seem to speak English pretty well to me. I have no doubt you are doing a much better job with English than I could with your language, so please bear with us. Fraternally, Klo ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
Re: [MLL]I'm back...too
Sven Buttler wrote: Hi Klo, Jim and everyone, Actually I'm right here although I haven't been following the list for the last couple of months to be honest. I have been spending much time in the Linux and Opem Source movement and I have to confess that I even considered leaving the MLL'S moderators panel for good at some point down the road. Time is precious as you well know. Still I hope to be able to contribute to the management of the list even tho not in the way I used to in the past. This being said, I'd like to thank comrade Moreira for his dedication and for keeping the list up for the last couple of months. Talk to you later. For communism Sven Buttler Welcome back Sven. Always good to hear from you. People with a sensible analysis of life are a rare breed in this day and age and I would not like to see you fade out of the picture. I was only recently asking if anyone knew of your whereabouts. Fraternally, Klo PS. What is the "Linux and Opem Source movement." PS: Jim, could you please send your private email address and phone number? Thanks --- Jim Hillier wrote: Hello comrades, I'm back after a long absence. I've a lot to catch up on, so I'll be keeping a low profile for a while. In the meantime, I'd like to say welcome to Harry Steel - we've rubbed shoulders on the truly awful UK Left list run by the Conrad sect. For communism Jim Welcome back Jim. I was just asking about you. Where is Sven Butler by the way and would you give us your views on this Weekly Worker situation in Britain which has come up. Fraternally, Klo ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
Re: [MLL]Re: Marxist-Leninist-List digest, Vol 1 #485 - 11 msgs
Jake Lowen wrote: Whats wrong with calling Castro a dictator or Stalin a mass murderer? These sound like fairly accurate statements to me. My reply, That's the problem. They may sound that way to your indoctrinated mind but they aren't, and that's what counts. Fidel turned a popular revolution into a cult of personality, My reply, That is a silly slander for which you have no evidence whatever. If you do, then provide it. Otherwise, confess that you owe Fidel an apology. and we wont even mentioned Stalin's purges. My reply, So what is wrong with a purge? Clearly you don't even know what it is. Are you saying the Party should be like all bourgeois parties and not take a bath periodically to cleanse itself of corrupting influences. Since Lenin initiated one of the biggest in 1921 are you saying he was wrong as well. Thats the problem with the left today, we feel we have to idolize any individual who has reflected our views at all. My reply, Correction! A major problem with the left today is that it is heavily infiltrated by surreptitious anti-Marxists such as yourself. When in reality these are just normal people, flawed and egocentric. My reply, They are neither normal nor as flawed as others. People such as Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin, and Castro are definitely far above average in awareness and intelligence and far more capable of assessing reality correctly. They are not perfect but they are light years ahead of their competition, and that includes people like you. (thats what i would say about Castro anyway, My reply, Those living in Miami giving that same sermon are known as gusanos. Why don't you join that benighted gang. for fear of being shunned from the list I wont talk about how Stalin bastardized everything lennin stood for) My reply, Now that's an utterly unfounded slander without so much as a shred of proof being provided. Do you ever provide evidence for anything or are we just supposed to take your word for it. Like all those lacking in information you revel in glittering generalites and avoid facts and specifics like they had the plague. Preparing for the onslaught, My reply, That's one of your major failings. You aren't prepared for much of anything other than to mouthe the platitudes you have swallowed so willingly like a front-row child listening to, and awed by, an anti-Marxist lecturer. For the cause, Klo PS. Obviously someone was asleep at the switch again. Otherwise, Jake would never have been able to vomit on our list of delicious delights. As I said many times before, we should create another list on which we can debate misguided people such as he but critters such as this have no business on this list. JL Message: 8 From: "hkb" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [MLL]Weekly Worker 376 (21/3/01) Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2001 07:36:32 +0100 charset="iso-8859-1" Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] The Weekly Worker is NOT the paper of the Communist Party Of Great Britain, but of a tiny Trotskyite sect which (mis)uses the name. It's paper, the Weekly Wrecker is famous soley for being no more than a fractional gossip sheet for the Left in the UK. They call for the violent overthrow of Cuba's socialist system and describe Fidel Castro as a "Dictator" and describe Stalin as a "mass murderer". During the NATO war against Yugoslavia, the Weekly Worker were vocal in their support for the KLA - even printing an interview with a KLA commander at the height of the war and calling for "Victory To The KLA"! After the recent bombing of Iraq they gave tacit approval to this terrorist action on the front-page of their paper. And during the CIA coup in Yugoslavia they ran with the fron-page headline "TRY MILOSOVIC". Ian Donovan, a leading Weekly Worker 'ideologist' who penned the article mentioned below on Macedonia, openly boasts that he considers Communists to be the same as Hitlers Nazi's and regularly describes anyone who opposes NATO imperialism as "Red/Brown" and liberally throws in accusations of communist "anti-semitism" and "mass murder". And to top it all off, the Weekly Worker are open advocates of the lagalisation of peadophilia and heroin. Don't believe me? It's all available on their website (see below). J. ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
Re: [MLL]I'm back
Jim Hillier wrote: Hello comrades, I'm back after a long absence. I've a lot to catch up on, so I'll be keeping a low profile for a while. In the meantime, I'd like to say welcome to Harry Steel - we've rubbed shoulders on the truly awful UK Left list run by the Conrad sect. For communism Jim Welcome back Jim. I was just asking about you. Where is Sven Butler by the way and would you give us your views on this Weekly Worker situation in Britain which has come up. Fraternally, Klo ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
Re: [MLL]On Webb's Strategy and Tactics
Harry Steele wrote: Yes, but is it not the case that in the past communists have helped to successfully form an alliance between the working class and other classes including what could be termed the petit-bourgouise? This was the case in China where the "national bourgouise" were seen as a potential ally against the "comprador" elements who had allied themselves with imperialism -- there are plenty of other examples. In a period where capitalism is taking on increasingly monopolistic forms and there is a concentration of capital in an increasingly small number of giant companies, is there not a case for trying to win over some small business people, shop keepers, locally based small companies etc to the view that a socialised and planned economy is in their interests? That does not mean reducing the import of the working class, but could be seen as part of a strategy of winning allies for the class and the party couldn't it? Harry You made a valid point Harry. Lenin noted that members of the petty bourgeois are torn between two attractions. On the one hand they are private property owners and as such have a definite inclination to support capitalism. But, on the other hand, they work for a living with their own property and as such have a definite affinity for, and kinship with, the proletariat. So when the struggle intensifies some will undoubtedly be more sympathetic with the forces for socialism than those for capitalism. For the cause, Klo From: KloMcKinsey [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: MLLlist [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [MLL]On Webb's Strategy and Tactics Date: Sat, 24 Mar 2001 16:27:37 +0800 STRATEGY OF THE CPUSA While perusing the website of the CPUSA I decided to read an article by Sam Webb, National Chair of the CPUSA, entitled Discussion on Strategy and Tactics. Although much of the document is commendable I must respectfully disagree with an important assertion that is repeated several times. Nearly halfway through the writing he makes the following statements, "Let me try to illustrate this point with a single example: our strategic approach in present circumstances isn't identical with our approach, say in the late 1950's and early 1960's, but it hasn't changed greatly either. Its thrust then and now is against corporate domination of our nation's political and economic life." Later he says, "The policy rests on the fact that large corporations and banks dominate the political and economic life of our country as well as form the structural underpinnings of the system of capitalism. With their economic and political power, these corporate behemoths determine the fate of hundreds of millions of people at home and around the globe. And he also states, "Stagnating wages and income, high energy costs, rising unemployment, skyrocketing rents, privatization of public services, the wage gap, strike breaking, persistent racism and discrimination, the corruption of our political process, the erosion of our democratic rights, anti-immigrant bashing, environmental degradation, persistent and growing poverty, and militarist aggression - all of this and more can be traced in one way or another to monopoly corporations and banks and their relentless search for maximum corporate profits. That's their bottom line." And finally he contends, "The anti-monopoly strategy is our path to socialism." To that which is implied by these comments I say, No it is not our path to socialism, nor has it ever been. This is a petty bourgeois ideological approach that is quite acceptable to a large segment of capitalist society. An anti-monopoly strategy does not equal an anti-capitalist strategy and it is certainly not equatable with a pro-socialist philosophy. Sams philosophy in this regard is not only quite acceptable to the petty bourgeois class but lies at the core of many of their preachings. In fact, Sam implies as much when he says, "Even some segments of the capitalist class feel the pinch of its policies." Exactly, and that is why these segments are the strongest advocates of anti-trust laws and similar legislation, but theirs is neither an anti-capitalist or pro-socialist program. Later Sam says, "It [the program he is advocating] aims to unite millions of our nation's working people and their allies to radically curb the political and economic power of the biggest monopolies. It is at once a class and a democratic struggle." This comment is misleading because it implies a pro-socialist orientation is present when, in fact, it is not. Yes, it is a class struggle, but a struggle of the petty bourgeois against the big bourgeoisie, not of the proletariat against the capitalists, both big and petty. Yes, it is a democratic struggle but a fight for democracy for which class. The p
[MLL]On Webb's Strategy and Tactics
STRATEGY OF THE CPUSA While perusing the website of the CPUSA I decided to read an article by Sam Webb, National Chair of the CPUSA, entitled Discussion on Strategy and Tactics. Although much of the document is commendable I must respectfully disagree with an important assertion that is repeated several times. Nearly halfway through the writing he makes the following statements, "Let me try to illustrate this point with a single example: our strategic approach in present circumstances isn't identical with our approach, say in the late 1950's and early 1960's, but it hasn't changed greatly either. Its thrust then and now is against corporate domination of our nation's political and economic life." Later he says, "The policy rests on the fact that large corporations and banks dominate the political and economic life of our country as well as form the structural underpinnings of the system of capitalism. With their economic and political power, these corporate behemoths determine the fate of hundreds of millions of people at home and around the globe. And he also states, "Stagnating wages and income, high energy costs, rising unemployment, skyrocketing rents, privatization of public services, the wage gap, strike breaking, persistent racism and discrimination, the corruption of our political process, the erosion of our democratic rights, anti-immigrant bashing, environmental degradation, persistent and growing poverty, and militarist aggression - all of this and more can be traced in one way or another to monopoly corporations and banks and their relentless search for maximum corporate profits. That's their bottom line." And finally he contends, "The anti-monopoly strategy is our path to socialism." To that which is implied by these comments I say, No it is not our path to socialism, nor has it ever been. This is a petty bourgeois ideological approach that is quite acceptable to a large segment of capitalist society. An anti-monopoly strategy does not equal an anti-capitalist strategy and it is certainly not equatable with a pro-socialist philosophy. Sams philosophy in this regard is not only quite acceptable to the petty bourgeois class but lies at the core of many of their preachings. In fact, Sam implies as much when he says, "Even some segments of the capitalist class feel the pinch of its policies." Exactly, and that is why these segments are the strongest advocates of anti-trust laws and similar legislation, but theirs is neither an anti-capitalist or pro-socialist program. Later Sam says, "It [the program he is advocating] aims to unite millions of our nation's working people and their allies to radically curb the political and economic power of the biggest monopolies. It is at once a class and a democratic struggle." This comment is misleading because it implies a pro-socialist orientation is present when, in fact, it is not. Yes, it is a class struggle, but a struggle of the petty bourgeois against the big bourgeoisie, not of the proletariat against the capitalists, both big and petty. Yes, it is a democratic struggle but a fight for democracy for which class. The petty bourgeois or the proletariat. Being exploited by the petty bourgeois is no less exploitation than being exploited by the big bourgeoisie. Exploitation is exploitation. Sam states, "We believe that in the course of this struggle to reign in corporate economic and political power, the working class and its allies will not only gain in experience, unity, and organization, but also come to see the necessity of socialist transformation of society." That could very well be but were that to occur it would be in spite of Sams approach, not because of it. If proletarians follow his strategy, realizations will come to them through their own experiences and not through any information or data conveyed to them by the M-L vanguard, because the latter will have been concentrating its energies and intentions on convincing the proletariat that the road to financial justice lay through curbing monopolies, oligopolies and cartels rather than through their abolishment and the institution of socialism. And finally Sam states, "Furthermore, we have to find and seek out those features that are peculiarly American and that have to be taken into account in elaborating a strategic path to anti-monopoly democracy and socialism. Again he is equating the anti-monopoly struggle with the struggle for socialism. They are not identical and one can quite easily engage in the former while having no interest in, and providing no support to, the latter. For the cause, Klo ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
[MLL][Fwd: [stalinskaya] DPRK On Relations With US]
Does anyone have any significant info on this group. I got on their list somehow and have been receiving their messages. Re: [stalinskaya] DPRK On Relations With US Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 18:54:40 +0800 From: KloMcKinsey [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Organization: none To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Red Rebel wrote: STOP NATO: NO PASARAN! - HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK - It is good to see the DPRK explaining and defending its positions as that certainly enables its allies to justify and disseminate its views and policies more easily. Spokesman for DPRK Foreign Ministry on new U.S. administration's policy towards DPRK Pyongyang, February 22 (KCNA) -- A spokesman for the Foreign Ministry of the DPRK Wednesday released a statement as regards the new U.S. administration's policy towards the DPRK. The statement says: There are a variety of opinions in the U.S. over the issue of its policy towards the DPRK, which draw its serious attention. Foreign and national security policy team of the new U.S. administration are increasingly assertive for a "hardline stance" towards Pyongyang, claiming that the former Clinton administration only offered things to the north, tempted by it, the new administration would pursue an "engagement policy" different from that of the Clinton administration and it would make "phased access" and "conditional and strict reciprocity." This once again disclosed the U.S. aggressive and brigandish true intention to stop the DPRK-U.S. relations from developing in the direction of reconciliation, cooperation and improved ties in keeping with the present international trend towards peace and stability and break the DPRK's will with "strength." this compels us to heighten vigilance. If this is an official stand of the new U.S. administration towards the DPRK, this can not but draw a serious attention. Both the DPRK and the U.S. agreed to remove the root cause of long-standing distrust, confrontation and misunderstanding and normalize relations in the Geneva DPRK-U.S. agreed framework and the New York DPRK-U.S. joint communique, etc. Accordingly, both sides are committed to terminate the hostile relations, build confidence and remove their apprehension. The "conditional reciprocity" and "phased access" touted by the U.S., therefore, mean that it would fulfil its commitments only when the DPRK moves first. In other words, it wants the DPRK to totally disarm itself first. The U.S. is seriously mistaken if it thinks that Pyongyang will accept its demand. It is the consistent stand of the DPRK that it will be able to clear the U.S. of its worries over its security only when it assures the DPRK that Washington does not threaten the DPRK's security by taking substantial measures to terminate the hostile relations. As for the "reciprocity" asserted by the U.S. it has never offered anything to the DPRK gratis but caused only losses to it. The DPRK-U.S. agreed framework calls for simultaneous actions on the part of the two sides and the DPRK has so far kept its nuclear power facilities frozen according to it. However, the U.S. has not sincerely implemented its commitments under the agreed framework, causing huge losses to the DPRK. The LWR project which had been scheduled to be completed by 2003 is unlikely to become a reality and the U.S. has not yet set out even a timetable for the offer of heavy oil for a new fiscal year that began from October 22 last year. The U.S. is obliged to compensate for the DPRK's loss of electricity caused by the delayed LWR project. If it does not honestly implement the agreed framework as today, there is no need for us to be bound to it any longer. We cannot but consider the existence of the KEDO as meaningless under the present situation where no one can tell when the lwr project will be completed. The United States must clearly know that we cannot wait for its completion for an indefinite period. The U.S. insisted on establishing the NMD alledgedly to cope with the "missile threat" from the DPRK, calling it a "rogue state", not away from its outdated way of thinking, though humankind greeted the new century of genuine peace after putting an end to the 20th century marked with war, confrontation and blood. This is a brigandish logic. We advanced such reasonable proposals as declaring a moratorium on the test-fire of long-range missiles while the missile negotiations are under way because the U.S. asserted that our missiles for self-defence pose a threat to it. We made to the U.S. side a series of reasonable proposals that we mi
Re: [MLL]List matters
"Charles F. Moreira" wrote: Comrades, Klo wrote:- Charles I am getting a stream of messages I sent out weeks ago that have already been posted. Klo Thanks, that's them. However did you notice any duplicates? Charles None, but once is too much. Klo ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
Re: [MLL]List matters
"Charles F. Moreira" wrote: Comrades, My resposne to Javad was held up but this time I've managed to release it from the WWPublish server and subsequently released 26 other messages and approved three subscription requests. However, I don't see the 26 messages, though they may come later. The wwpublish server is rather slow at times. Fraternally Charles ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list Charles I am getting a stream of messages I sent out weeks ago that have already been posted. Klo ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
Re: [MLL]Foreign Ministry Spokesman on Tiananmen Papers
FINALLY I FOUND TIME TO REPLY TO JOES MESSAGES. (snip) Joe says, One more thing. On that Tito and Gorby part what I meant was that they both claimed to be socialists and both had socialist elements in their societies. Just like China they both attempted to mentain a socialist picture, and as you know very well both were phonies. My reply, I agree with your assessment of these two charlatans but dont agree with your linkage of China with them. I would need more evidence to reach that conclusion and there is too much to the contrary. As for China's involvments in Iraq or Yugoslavia, you are very wrong. It is very un-communistic of you to say that China should get involved only with those conflcts that interest or affect them. My reply, Where did I say that? That would be a totally selfish, un-Marxist stance. Stalin became involved in the Spanish Civil War and the Soviet Unions direct interests were not at stake. Che didn't go to Algeria because it interested him. Stalin didn't attack Japan because it interested him. Castro didn't aid Angola because it intereseted him. My reply, Stalin attacked Japan in fulfillment of a treaty obligation and the Soviet Unions interests were directly involved. As communists China has a duty to oppose imperialist aggressions wherever they may be, by any means neccessary. My reply, That is a ridiculous statement. Are you serious? By any means necessary. You are not only talking war, a war in which China could very well be going against the US but most of Europe but a war in which China would have to go way around the world to fight. In addition, Fidel was aiding other Marxists and that most assuredly does not apply to Saddam Hussein who imprisoned and killed Marxists. He virtually wiped out the CP of Iraq and yet you would go to war for him. Speak for yourself. Include me out. Just because someone hates the US does not automatically mean he is my ally. Hitler hated the US too, but he certainly would never have been my ally. He essentially destroyed the German Communist Party which was a very powerful force in Germany in the early 1930s. Why do you think Hitler got so much aid from the German capitalists? A similar situation exists with respect to the religious/fascist Taliban in Afghanistan, an organization I detest and which has turned that poor country into a living hell with thousands of people doing anything they can think of to get out. Even revisionist Russia aided tremendously revolutionary activities throughout the world. My reply, Revolutionary activities is the key phrase and they dont apply to Hussein or Milosevich. While today's China talks loudly in the UN, but obstaines on all votes. they talk loudly on Yugoslavia, but nothing more than some eggs on the US ambassy. My reply, China abstains on all votes. Thats not what I have heard and read. And again what do you want them to do to the US and its flunkies? Would you spell out your specifics? While Yugoslavia was being bombed and Kosovo and Albania were being invaded China was making deals with the US. Now I don't know about you, but that is not very socialist of them. My reply, Exactly who do you want China to fight for? Who are you willing to go to war for to save? Frankly I have a hard time finding any real Marxist groups with substantive power in the entire Balkans. Milosevich is the best of the bunch but hes no prize and his Marxist credentials are poor. Andyou know what I would have told Kruschiev: Full steam ahead!!. That is what. What were US ships going to do? Fire on Soviet Navy ships, the USSR, a nuclear power??? Risk starting a nuclear war?? I think Kennedy wanted to hold on to his ass a bit longer. It was a great shame that Kruschiev gave in to the capitalist black mail. My reply, You said, I think Kennedy wanted to hold on to his ass a bit longer. You THINK, you THINK. Now that is really responsible leadership! On your hunch, your intutition, you are willing to risk a Nuclear War. You and I are clearly on different frequencies. Your flippant, irresponsible attitude toward potential conflict situations and a World War is absurd. You hyjack the name Joseph Stalin but if you had been living in the Soviet Union of the 1930s and witnessed all the pacts, treaties, agreements he and Litvinov worked feverishly to negotiate to avoid war at practically any price and the number of opportunities he passed over to strike out, you would have been denouncing him with a vengeance. Hitler took Czechoslovakia and shipped massive arms to Spain and you no doubt would have seen that as an opportunity to attack. Stalin most assuredly did not. One fact is unmistakable. If you were leading a socialist state you would have its citizens in a war in no time at all. Your attitude seems to be: Fight now and talk later. Do you think Cuba
Re: [MLL]Foreign Ministry Spokesman on Tiananmen Papers
=== message truncated === Joe says, Well, finnaly we have all the main points laid out here, and I shall be glad to give you my side. First of all I will start by telling you that even if I do have an "identity problem" you surely have a memory one. Someone please remind Klo that the name that appears next to my posts is Joseph Stalin. My reply, I keep getting messages from you that say on my computer screen, from Joseph Stalin and the fact is that you are not Joseph Stalin. Now that should end the topic. El Comandante Che is my name on my website, something you need not be concerned about. My reply, Secondly, you are not Che Guevara either so please stop appropriating his name. Indeed, some of your ideas would be rejected by both Che and Stalin and no doubt they would dislike hearing statements made under their by-line which they would reject. Therefore, I never called myself Che on this NG, and I never called myself J.Stalin on my webiste. My reply, But you have vice versa, so dont try to squirm out of it. The bottom line is that you are using names that dont apply and arent yours. So the answer to that is I don't have an identity problem. Please refrain from making such provocatory remarks. We can all get tought around here. My reply, I am just stating what appears to be fact. You are the one who views it as a provocation. But we are not British football fans. Second, You are right, the world is not black and white. But the level at which you "cooperate" with capitalists varies greatly. As I pointed out earlier what Stalin did is very different from what Deng did. First of all the level of capitalist investments in the USSR was tiny. My reply, That is a difference in degree rather than kind which I mentioned some time ago. Second, Stalin bought the factories from Ford and others, aquired licences to produce the products under Russian names, opperated the factories, paid the workers, owned the products and made whatever use of the products Stalin saw fit. This is what happens when you aquire a license to produce the goods. My reply, You make it sound as if no profits were involved. If that were true, why would the capitalists invest there at all. Far different in China. The factories are owned by the companies. The workers are paied by the companies. The companies own the products, and the company sells the product as it sees fit. Certainly, there is nothing in common between these two modes. Certainly, a worker in China being paid 40$ a month cant afford to buy too many Mercedes and Volvos, now can he?? So please, refrain from making any more comparisons between Stalin and Deng, just to honor Stalin's name if nothing else. My reply, This is the first point you have made throughout our entire discussion that really is substantive and merits serious consideration. It has concerned me as well and its a major reason I said I would like to have all the details of the investment agreements that have been concluded. I know Lenin granted concessions to the capitalists in which the latter could own Soviet resources and was roundly denounced for doing so by many. On pages 48 and 48 in *Through the Russian Revolution* Albert Williams, a strong, on-the-scene supporter of the bolsheviks, states, American technicians, engineers and administrators Lenin particularly held in high esteem. He wanted five thousand of them, he wanted them at once, and was ready to pay them the highest salaries. He was constantly assailed for having a peculiar leaning toward America. Indeed, his enemies cynically referred to him as the agent of the Wall Street bankers, and in the heat of debate the extreme Left hurled this charge in his face. As a matter of fact, American capitalism was to him not less evil than the capitalism of any other nation. But America was so far away. It did not offer a direct threat to the life of Soviet Russia. And it did offer the goods and experts that Soviet Russia needed. Why is it not then to the mutual interest of the two countries to make a special agreement? asked Lenin. But is it possible for a communistic state to deal with a capitalistic state? Can the two forms live side by side? These are questions put to Lenin by Naudeau. Why not? said Lenin. We want technicians, scientists and the various products of industry, and it is clear that we by ourselves are incapable of developing the immense resources of this country. Under the circumstances, though it may be unpleasant for us, we must admit that our principles, which hold in Russia, must, beyond our frontiers, give place to political agreements. We very sincerely propose to pay interest on our foreign loans, and in default of cash we will pay them in grain, oil, and all sorts of raw materials in which we are rich. We have decided to grant concessions of
[MLL][Fwd: Warning: could not send message for past 4 hours]
From Klo ** ** THIS IS A WARNING MESSAGE ONLY ** ** YOU DO NOT NEED TO RESEND YOUR MESSAGE ** ** The original message was received at Thu, 1 Feb 2001 21:45:15 -0500 (EST) from d67.as0.clmb.oh.voyager.net [216.127.10.67] - The following addresses had transient non-fatal errors - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Transcript of session follows - 451 [EMAIL PROTECTED]... reply: read error from lists.wwpublish.com. [EMAIL PROTECTED]... Deferred: Connection reset by lists.wwpublish.com. Warning: message still undelivered after 4 hours Will keep trying until message is 5 days old Reporting-MTA: dns; mailcore1.oh.voyager.net Arrival-Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2001 21:45:15 -0500 (EST) Final-Recipient: RFC822; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Action: delayed Status: 4.4.2 Remote-MTA: DNS; lists.wwpublish.com Last-Attempt-Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 01:58:49 -0500 (EST) Will-Retry-Until: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 21:45:15 -0500 (EST) FINALLY I FOUND TIME TO REPLY TO JOES MESSAGES. (snip) Joe says, One more thing. On that Tito and Gorby part what I meant was that they both claimed to be socialists and both had socialist elements in their societies. Just like China they both attempted to mentain a socialist picture, and as you know very well both were phonies. My reply, I agree with your assessment of these two charlatans but dont agree with your linkage of China with them. I would need more evidence to reach that conclusion and there is too much to the contrary. As for China's involvments in Iraq or Yugoslavia, you are very wrong. It is very un-communistic of you to say that China should get involved only with those conflcts that interest or affect them. My reply, Where did I say that? That would be a totally selfish, un-Marxist stance. Stalin became involved in the Spanish Civil War and the Soviet Unions direct interests were not at stake. Che didn't go to Algeria because it interested him. Stalin didn't attack Japan because it interested him. Castro didn't aid Angola because it intereseted him. My reply, Stalin attacked Japan in fulfillment of a treaty obligation and the Soviet Unions interests were directly involved. As communists China has a duty to oppose imperialist aggressions wherever they may be, by any means neccessary. My reply, That is a ridiculous statement. Are you serious? By any means necessary. You are not only talking war, a war in which China could very well be going against the US but most of Europe but a war in which China would have to go way around the world to fight. In addition, Fidel was aiding other Marxists and that most assuredly does not apply to Saddam Hussein who imprisoned and killed Marxists. He virtually wiped out the CP of Iraq and yet you would go to war for him. Speak for yourself. Include me out. Just because someone hates the US does not automatically mean he is my ally. Hitler hated the US too, but he certainly would never have been my ally. He essentially destroyed the German Communist Party which was a very powerful force in Germany in the early 1930s. Why do you think Hitler got so much aid from the German capitalists? A similar situation exists with respect to the religious/fascist Taliban in Afghanistan, an organization I detest and which has turned that poor country into a living hell with thousands of people doing anything they can think of to get out. Even revisionist Russia aided tremendously revolutionary activities throughout the world. My reply, Revolutionary activities is the key phrase and they dont apply to Hussein or Milosevich. While today's China talks loudly in the UN, but obstaines on all votes. they talk loudly on Yugoslavia, but nothing more than some eggs on the US ambassy. My reply, China abstains on all votes. Thats not what I have heard and read. And again what do you want them to do to the US and its flunkies? Would you spell out your specifics? While Yugoslavia was being bombed and Kosovo and Albania were being invaded China was making deals with the US. Now I don't know about you, but that is not very socialist of them. My reply, Exactly who do you want China to fight for? Who are you willing to go to war for to save? Frankly I have a hard time finding any real Marxist groups with substantive power in the entire Balkans. Milosevich is the best of the bunch but hes no prize and his Marxist credentials are poor. Andyou know what I would have told Kruschiev: Full steam ahead!!. That is what. What were US ships going to do? Fire on Soviet Navy ships, the USSR, a nuclear power??? Risk starting a nuclear war?? I think Kennedy wanted to hold on to his ass a bit longer. It was a great shame that Kruschiev gave in to the capitalist black mail. My reply, You said, I think Kennedy
[MLL][Fwd: Warning: could not send message for past 4 hours]
From Klo ** ** THIS IS A WARNING MESSAGE ONLY ** ** YOU DO NOT NEED TO RESEND YOUR MESSAGE ** ** The original message was received at Thu, 1 Feb 2001 22:03:46 -0500 (EST) from d282.as1.clmb.oh.voyager.net [216.28.53.26] - The following addresses had transient non-fatal errors - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Transcript of session follows - 451 [EMAIL PROTECTED]... reply: read error from lists.wwpublish.com. [EMAIL PROTECTED]... Deferred: Connection reset by lists.wwpublish.com. Warning: message still undelivered after 4 hours Will keep trying until message is 5 days old Reporting-MTA: dns; mailcore4.oh.voyager.net Arrival-Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2001 22:03:46 -0500 (EST) Final-Recipient: RFC822; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Action: delayed Status: 4.4.2 Remote-MTA: DNS; lists.wwpublish.com Last-Attempt-Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 02:20:29 -0500 (EST) Will-Retry-Until: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 22:03:46 -0500 (EST) (snip) === message truncated === Klo, why do you have to engage in pointless arguments about what my web name is. What does it really matter. Can't you find a better argument to criticise me on? My reply, This has always been a side issue with me and you know it, so dont try to paint it as something it isnt in order to put me on the defensive. You conveniently ignore the fact that I even included it as part of a P.S. I don't know how you got the impression that I called myself Comandante Che in this NG. Could someone tell me or Klo when I have ever called myself Comandante Che in this NG?? As far as I know you called me Comandante Che when you visited my site. I thought we agreed to drop this topic, but it seems you are a bit reluctant. My reply, The only names I have seen in your messages in regard to you personally are Commandante Che and Joseph Stalin, neither of which you are. Now why dont you tell me your real name or make up a pseudonym and use it, so we can more on to more substantive issues. And no, I don't disagree with Rafael on when socialism beggun in Russia. He says it was established as a system after Stalin, after the collectivisation and industralisation. This is exactly what Stalin (no, I don't mean me. I think you are smarter not to confuse the two, and certainly claiming that you can't doesn't help your image) said. My reply, Why dont you and Rafael do a better job of identifying who is saying what on your messages. Earlier I attributed to him comments that were being made by you because of nebulosity. As far as this particular point is concerned, it is the only significant one I have found in which my view seems to differ from Stalins. Not long ago I was reading Chuevs interview of Molotov and noticed the latter seemed to have the same problem with Stalins formulation and agreed with me. If socialism was established in the Soviet Union after Stalin or near the end of his leadership, then what kind of system did they have previously. For the cause, Klo PS. Most important: I am still waiting for replies to all those political questions I posed which you have studiously avoided answering. Do you want me to repeat them for the umpteenth time? This is the kind of response I received repeatedly on the Trot NG and is a major reason I left their benightedness. They were quick to attack Soso but evaded offering alternatives or answering queries. Simply stated, the would tell you what they were against but not what they were for. Tomorrow I will try to reply to the post from Charles which is more thoughtful.
[MLL][Fwd: Important: Report government/police misconduct on Jan. 20]
They sent me this on the demonstrations. Klo Important follow-up to the January 20 protest at Bush's inauguration: The Partnership for Civil Justice and the National Lawyers Guild needs your information. If you either WITNESSED or were SUBJECTED TO any of the following, please without delay submit your information to the government misconduct reporting form located at www.JusticeOnline.org: - pat downs of pockets or any other type of pat down - waiving of ticket bearers through Inaugural checkpoints - prevention of persons bearing signs from accessing areas along Pennsylvania Avenue open to all others - disruption of processions of people towards the parade route - stops and frisks - beatings - ANY arrests - any type of differential treatment by law enforcement of demonstrators, as compared to Bush supporters - any form of harassment - confiscation of material This information is needed ASAP. Go to www.JusticeOnline.org to report any information that you have. International Action Center 39 West 14th Street, Room 206 New York, NY 10011 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] web: http://www.iacenter.org CHECK OUT SITE http://www.mumia2000.org phone: 212 633-6646 fax: 212 633-2889 *To make a tax-deductible donation, go to http://www.peoplesrightsfund.org
[MLL][Fwd: Warning: could not send message for past 4 hours]
From Klo ** ** THIS IS A WARNING MESSAGE ONLY ** ** YOU DO NOT NEED TO RESEND YOUR MESSAGE ** ** The original message was received at Thu, 1 Feb 2001 21:45:31 -0500 (EST) from d67.as0.clmb.oh.voyager.net [216.127.10.67] - The following addresses had transient non-fatal errors - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Transcript of session follows - [EMAIL PROTECTED]... Deferred: Connection reset by lists.wwpublish.com. Warning: message still undelivered after 4 hours Will keep trying until message is 5 days old Reporting-MTA: dns; mailcore1.oh.voyager.net Arrival-Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2001 21:45:31 -0500 (EST) Final-Recipient: RFC822; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Action: delayed Status: 4.4.2 Remote-MTA: DNS; lists.wwpublish.com Last-Attempt-Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 01:58:49 -0500 (EST) Will-Retry-Until: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 21:45:31 -0500 (EST) === message truncated === Joe says, Well, finnaly we have all the main points laid out here, and I shall be glad to give you my side. First of all I will start by telling you that even if I do have an "identity problem" you surely have a memory one. Someone please remind Klo that the name that appears next to my posts is Joseph Stalin. My reply, I keep getting messages from you that say on my computer screen, from Joseph Stalin and the fact is that you are not Joseph Stalin. Now that should end the topic. El Comandante Che is my name on my website, something you need not be concerned about. My reply, Secondly, you are not Che Guevara either so please stop appropriating his name. Indeed, some of your ideas would be rejected by both Che and Stalin and no doubt they would dislike hearing statements made under their by-line which they would reject. Therefore, I never called myself Che on this NG, and I never called myself J.Stalin on my webiste. My reply, But you have vice versa, so dont try to squirm out of it. The bottom line is that you are using names that dont apply and arent yours. So the answer to that is I don't have an identity problem. Please refrain from making such provocatory remarks. We can all get tought around here. My reply, I am just stating what appears to be fact. You are the one who views it as a provocation. But we are not British football fans. Second, You are right, the world is not black and white. But the level at which you "cooperate" with capitalists varies greatly. As I pointed out earlier what Stalin did is very different from what Deng did. First of all the level of capitalist investments in the USSR was tiny. My reply, That is a difference in degree rather than kind which I mentioned some time ago. Second, Stalin bought the factories from Ford and others, aquired licences to produce the products under Russian names, opperated the factories, paid the workers, owned the products and made whatever use of the products Stalin saw fit. This is what happens when you aquire a license to produce the goods. My reply, You make it sound as if no profits were involved. If that were true, why would the capitalists invest there at all. Far different in China. The factories are owned by the companies. The workers are paied by the companies. The companies own the products, and the company sells the product as it sees fit. Certainly, there is nothing in common between these two modes. Certainly, a worker in China being paid 40$ a month cant afford to buy too many Mercedes and Volvos, now can he?? So please, refrain from making any more comparisons between Stalin and Deng, just to honor Stalin's name if nothing else. My reply, This is the first point you have made throughout our entire discussion that really is substantive and merits serious consideration. It has concerned me as well and its a major reason I said I would like to have all the details of the investment agreements that have been concluded. I know Lenin granted concessions to the capitalists in which the latter could own Soviet resources and was roundly denounced for doing so by many. On pages 48 and 48 in *Through the Russian Revolution* Albert Williams, a strong, on-the-scene supporter of the bolsheviks, states, American technicians, engineers and administrators Lenin particularly held in high esteem. He wanted five thousand of them, he wanted them at once, and was ready to pay them the highest salaries. He was constantly assailed for having a peculiar leaning toward America. Indeed, his enemies cynically referred to him as the agent of the Wall Street bankers, and in the heat of debate the extreme Left hurled this charge in his face. As a matter of fact, American capitalism was to him not less evil than the capitalism of any other nation. But America was so far away. It did not offer a direct threat
Re: [MLL]Foreign Ministry Spokesman on Tiananmen Papers
[A correction below:] KloMcKinsey wrote: (snip) Klo says, > My reply, > We still dont agree on the aims and composition of > the Tian An Mien Commandante Che says, Well, there were one million people there, and certainly the students numbered in the thousands. My reply, You keep citing this figure. What is your evidence for its accuracy. You act as if you counted them yourself personally. Do you have some photographs of some kind. I cant help but feel that the capitalists would love to have photographs showing 1,000,000 people demonstrating against Chinas government. I feel quite confident that if such photographs existed they would be plastered into the fact (I meant to say "face" not "fact." of the worlds masses as often as those pictures of people chopping on the Berlin Wall which make the capitalists drool. The great majority were peasants and workers, not students. Even amongst the students, many were maoists. You are also right that there was a capitalist section there, no doubt about that. My reply, Quite the contrary. I think the great majority were capitalist agents and there was a small socialist contingent. Your NEP argument was very good, except that the NEP wasn't a system to encourage Kulak growth. My reply, You allow kulaks to operate virtually unhindered and thats not encouraging kulak growth? Lenin realised that the Soviet Union wasn't ready for collectivization. Therefore the NEP was a system to allow the present Kulak dominated country side to continue as it was, temporarely. My reply, By allowing it to continue he knew that would foster growth and therefore would not mean that it would continue as it was. No, the Soviet Union of Lenin wasn't entirely socialist. The cities were, but in the countryside the Kulaks still ruled. The differance between the NEP and the Chinese policy is deffenetly one of type and not size. Socialism in China was well established when Deng came along. There was NO NEED for a NEP. And yet Deng instituted one anyway. My reply, Here we disagree over how well Chinas economy was doing under Mao. I am not as satisfied as you. But regardless we both appear to agree that without some formidable economic figures clearly demonstrating a critical need for a continuing NEP style program, it is no longer needed. Why?? The only logical answer is that he wanted capitalist restoration. My reply, How can you possibly make that assertion in light of present and prior political policies. If Chinas leaders in general and Deng in particular are trying to restore capitalism, then why do they have press censorship of bourgeois propaganda? Why are capitalist political parties outlawed? Why, for instance, is Falun Gong tightly controlled and its demonstrations prohibited. This list can be extended for pages, was posed previously, and is systematically evaded by you. I am still waiting for a reply. You completely ignore the political positions, policies and actions of the Chinese government as if they were insignificant. Your basic contention in this regard has no substance whatever because it would be quite easy for the Chinese leadership to institute a capitalist system should they so desire. Indeed, it would be all too simple were they following in the traitorous path of Gorby. I am in a quandry as to why you persist in maintaining this wholly untenable position. If the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China decided to unleash the capitalists on the Chinese people and legalize all their usual political, social, economic, and religious activities, who would stop them? You say they already have. I say, if say if they already have, then why all the restrictions. You don't allow capitalist companies to flock into a socialist state and claim to be building socialism. My reply, With that I would essentially agree; but it depends on what you mean by flock. I see no flock or qualitative leap in China, but I do see more than enough encroachment to make me feel very concerned. You are right, trade with capitalists can be profitable, and is neccessary. You can't survive if you shut off the rest fo the world. But what Deng did was not trade with them, but allow them into China to exploit the people and take the profits. My reply, We covered that a couple of posts ago. You don't think of it as a "qualitative leap" that hundreds of capitalist factories opperate in China, and that the world market is flooded with cheap Chinese made goods?? My reply, No I dont because most of China is still socialist in essence. Kwantung Province, Shanghai, Beijing and some other areas to which investment is confined do not constitute the bulk of China. I think this is sort of different from what Mao had in mind for China. My reply, I would agree. As for Cuba, about 1% of its yearly income comes from foreign investments. My reply, I dare say it is larger than that, especially with regard to the tourist industry. Not some
Re: [MLL]Foreign Ministry Spokesman on Tiananmen Papers
Why do messages keep appearing that I sent out weeks ago. Here we have another one. Klo KloMcKinsey wrote: [A correction below:] KloMcKinsey wrote: (snip) Klo says, My reply, We still dont agree on the aims and composition of the Tian An Mien Commandante Che says, Well, there were one million people there, and certainly the students numbered in the thousands. My reply, You keep citing this figure. What is your evidence for its accuracy. You act as if you counted them yourself personally. Do you have some photographs of some kind. I cant help but feel that the capitalists would love to have photographs showing 1,000,000 people demonstrating against Chinas government. I feel quite confident that if such photographs existed they would be plastered into the fact (I meant to say "face" not "fact." of the worlds masses as often as those pictures of people chopping on the Berlin Wall which make the capitalists drool. The great majority were peasants and workers, not students. Even amongst the students, many were maoists. You are also right that there was a capitalist section there, no doubt about that. My reply, Quite the contrary. I think the great majority were capitalist agents and there was a small socialist contingent. Your NEP argument was very good, except that the NEP wasn't a system to encourage Kulak growth. My reply, You allow kulaks to operate virtually unhindered and thats not encouraging kulak growth? Lenin realised that the Soviet Union wasn't ready for collectivization. Therefore the NEP was a system to allow the present Kulak dominated country side to continue as it was, temporarely. My reply, By allowing it to continue he knew that would foster growth and therefore would not mean that it would continue as it was. No, the Soviet Union of Lenin wasn't entirely socialist. The cities were, but in the countryside the Kulaks still ruled. The differance between the NEP and the Chinese policy is deffenetly one of type and not size. Socialism in China was well established when Deng came along. There was NO NEED for a NEP. And yet Deng instituted one anyway. My reply, Here we disagree over how well Chinas economy was doing under Mao. I am not as satisfied as you. But regardless we both appear to agree that without some formidable economic figures clearly demonstrating a critical need for a continuing NEP style program, it is no longer needed. Why?? The only logical answer is that he wanted capitalist restoration. My reply, How can you possibly make that assertion in light of present and prior political policies. If Chinas leaders in general and Deng in particular are trying to restore capitalism, then why do they have press censorship of bourgeois propaganda? Why are capitalist political parties outlawed? Why, for instance, is Falun Gong tightly controlled and its demonstrations prohibited. This list can be extended for pages, was posed previously, and is systematically evaded by you. I am still waiting for a reply. You completely ignore the political positions, policies and actions of the Chinese government as if they were insignificant. Your basic contention in this regard has no substance whatever because it would be quite easy for the Chinese leadership to institute a capitalist system should they so desire. Indeed, it would be all too simple were they following in the traitorous path of Gorby. I am in a quandry as to why you persist in maintaining this wholly untenable position. If the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China decided to unleash the capitalists on the Chinese people and legalize all their usual political, social, economic, and religious activities, who would stop them? You say they already have. I say, if say if they already have, then why all the restrictions. You don't allow capitalist companies to flock into a socialist state and claim to be building socialism. My reply, With that I would essentially agree; but it depends on what you mean by flock. I see no flock or qualitative leap in China, but I do see more than enough encroachment to make me feel very concerned. You are right, trade with capitalists can be profitable, and is neccessary. You can't survive if you shut off the rest fo the world. But what Deng did was not trade with them, but allow them into China to exploit the people and take the profits. My reply, We covered that a couple of posts ago. You don't think of it as a "qualitative leap" that hundreds of capitalist factories opperate in China, and that the world market is flooded with cheap Chinese made goods?? My reply, No I dont because most of China is still socialist in essence. Kwantung Province, Shanghai, Beijing and some ot
[MLL][Fwd: [stalinskaya] Bush, Clinton in the web: Behind the assassinationof Kabila]
Someone wants to know if I am interested in joining: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Does anyone know anything about this group. They sent out this email. Klo - Via Workers World News Service Reprinted from the Feb. 1, 2001 issue of Workers World newspaper - BUSH,CLINTON IN THE WEB: BEHIND THE ASSASSINATION OF KABILA By Deirdre Griswold and Johnnie Stevens The failure of both Bill Clinton and George W. Bush to express even the most perfunctory regret over the assassination of Congo President Laurent Désiré Kabila betrays how implicated Washington is in this latest outrage against the most important country in central Africa. Washington's silence is even more glaring considering that its foreign policy experts are well aware that the African people view the secret intelligence agencies of the U.S. government, which work closely with corporations seeking vast fortunes in the region, as the probable authors of this crime. George Bush Sr., father of the president, even had an intimate connection with one of these plundering corporations. But this is not mentioned in the commercial media, which, as usual, go even further than indifference to insult the fallen head of state, while speculating on the breakup of the Congo. What they carefully omit in their reporting is the deadly record of U.S. interventions in the Congo, beginning with President Dwight D. Eisenhower's order at a meeting of the National Security Council on Aug. 18, 1960, to assassinate Patrice Lumumba. Lumumba was the young and inspiring independence leader who was briefly the Congo's first president. The 40th anniversary of his assassination, Jan. 17 of this year, was the day after Kabila was shot. The U.S. media are today blaming Kabila for failing to bring peace to the Congo. This is a monstrous charge, since Washington is largely responsible for the war that has crushed the Congolese people's hopes for a better life since the overthrow of dictator Mobutu Sese Seko. The Congo government has been trying to expel Rwandan and Ugandan troops that invaded eastern Congo in August 1998. The U.S. has secretly supported them and their occupation of this area of fabulous mineral wealth. The Congo's allies in this war are Zimbabwe, Angola and Namibia--all countries that had to fight racist colonial regimes to win their independence. The invaders, on the other hand, have been supplied with high-tech weaponry and communications and transportation equipment by their imperialist backers. There is evidence of military training and coordination from the Pentagon and the involvement of mercenary companies, including MPRI of the U.S., Executive Outcome of South Africa, and Sandline of Britain. KABILA RESISTED 'GLOBALIZATION' What U.S. corporations wanted from Kabila, and what he refused to give, was outright control over an area that contains some of the world's most important deposits of gold, diamonds, cobalt, manganese, uranium, copper, zinc, germanium, silver, lead, iron and tungsten. It has been Washington's theme song for the last decade that oppressed countries must join the global economy--meaning sell off state-owned enterprises to imperialist investors, open their domestic markets and devalue their currencies, thus further lowering the standard of living. Even Mobutu tried to resist this and hold on to state control over the mines--one of the reasons the U.S. decided to dump him after having propped him up for almost 35 years. Washington helped a coalition force headed by Kabila but based on Rwandan and Ugandan military forces to topple Mobutu in 1997. But once Kabila became president, he surprised his former allies by refusing to be a puppet and trying to rally the Congolese people to unite and defend their country's sovereignty. Kabila also retracted a number of mining contracts signed with U.S. and European corporations during the period of the alliance with Rwanda and Uganda. And he refused to pay back the huge debt to the International Monetary Fund and World Bank incurred by the Mobutu regime. For this, it seemed, they never forgave him. A most interesting essay on The geopolitical stakes of the international mining companies in the Democratic Republic of Congo by mining civil engineer Pierre Baracyetse can be found on the Web at www.africa2000.com/ UGANDA/mineralseng.html. It explains in detail the high stakes involved for foreign capital. BILLIONS OF DOLLARS AT STAKE American Mineral Fields (AMFI), a consortium based originally in Hope, Ark.--yes, Bill Clinton's hometown--is a big player in exploiting Congo's mineral wealth. In 1997, just a month before Mobutu fell, it signed contracts with the Kabila-Rwanda-Uganda alliance forces for almost a billion dollars investment in copper, cobalt and zinc mines and processing plants in Kolwezi and Kipushi. The industrial enterprises that set up AMFI, according to Baracyetse, are interested in the contract for the construction of the orbital
Re: [MLL]Question
Alan Dover wrote: Sorry Klo comrade, I am temporarily unable to correspond due to the need to nurse my wife again, which takes all of my time at present. Regrets. Alan. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of KloMcKinsey Sent: Wednesday, 14 February 2001 02:07 To: MLLlist Subject: [MLL]Question To the moderators. I earlier asked why we have not heard from Sven, Jim Hillier, Alan Dover and others but received no reply. Is there some reason for this? Who are the moderators at this time? Klo ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list Alan. I am sorry to hear about your wife and hope she gets well ASAP. Maybe Sven, Jim or someone else can reply instead. Fraternally, Klo ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
Re: [MLL]Question
George G wrote: Dear Klo, The moderators continue to be the three you mentioned, Sven, Jim and Alan, as well as Charles Moreira and myself, George Gruenthal. If several of us have not sid much recently, it is probably because we are busy with other activities. Fraternally, George Dear George. Thanks for replying. It's good to hear that you are all still around. Good people are hard to find and we don't want to lose the finest. I just had not heard from Jim, Sven, and Alan lately and was becoming concerned. Fraternally, Klo - Original Message - From: KloMcKinsey [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: MLLlist [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2001 8:06 AM Subject: [MLL]Question To the moderators. I earlier asked why we have not heard from Sven, Jim Hillier, Alan Dover and others but received no reply. Is there some reason for this? Who are the moderators at this time? Klo ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
[MLL]Question
To the moderators. I earlier asked why we have not heard from Sven, Jim Hillier, Alan Dover and others but received no reply. Is there some reason for this? Who are the moderators at this time? Klo ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
[MLL]question
Simple question. I don't remember reading anything in quite a while from Jim Hillier, Sven Butler, Alan Dover and a few other people on the list. Are they still members? Or maybe Javad and I just put them to sleep. Klo ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
Re: Fw: [MLL]Two Key Overlooked Considerations
Javad Eskandarpour wrote: Comrade Klo, In order to have to a critical constructive discussion on any subject, one must construct, logically, her/his own argument whenever one has a claim or diagrees with anyone's claim instead of "yes", "no" assertions, or "what about x?"-type questions. Let us practice this minimum guideline in our discussion without any usual formal consent as to the merit of this guideline without its actual practice. My reply, If you are saying we should all stick with facts and reason logically while eschewing opinions, slurs, slanders, and ad hominems, I fully concur. I would like to make some brief remarks on some of your statements because most of your statements are paraphrases of your previous ones that I have already made my remark on. (1)You state, refering to Lenin's The Proletarain Revolution and the Renegade Kautsky, that you are "well aware of that book's title" but I should realize that "Lenin is focusing on the outcome of the Revolution and the society that was established, not the nature of the class that actually carried out the revolution". So, according to Lenin, what is "the outcome of the Revolution"? A proletarian revolution? My reply, The outcome is the dictatorship of the proletariat. How can the outcome of the revolution be a proletarian revolution? Thats like saying the outcome of the revolution was a revolution. Your logic eludes me. If "the outcome of the Revolution" is a proletarian revolution, My reply, I just said it was not. why do you insist that "the kinds of revolutions [proletarian revolutions] you [I] are [am] referring to are yet to come"? My reply, To repeat. I just said that it was not. In fact, I stated in prior posts that the outcome was the dictatorship of the proletariat. This is becoming redundant. How many times have I said it was not, I repeat, it was not a proletarian but a peasant revolution that gave rise to the dictatorship of the proletariat. Hopefully I will not need to repeat this even more. So you are building and thrashing a strawman. You are pounding on a position I do not hold. Also, when you say that Lenin supposedly was not focusing on "the nature of the class that actually carried out the revolution" while focusing on "the outcome of the Revolution", you appear to insinuate the that the peasantry "actually carried out the revolution"! Well, if the peasantry "actually carried out the revolution", then why did not Lenin call "the revolution" a peasant revolution? Or Lenin was not focusing on this matter?! My reply, Its your final comment that matters. He was not focusing on this as I stated in a prior post. He was more focused on the outcome than the agent involved when it came to categorization. (2) I asked the following question: "which class is alone the revolutionary class against capitalism"? And you replied to it evasively again in the following way: "Well, the peasantry carried out the revolution and the latter resulted in the overthrow of Russian capitalism. What would you call it?" So, it seems that your answer to my question is "the peasantry"! My reply, You have this fixation with the word alone. No class alone did anything of significance that I am aware of; so please dont invoke it further. This is that all or none, black or white, approach popping through again. Secondly, I am now compelled to repeat for who knows how many times that the Russian Revolution, the Civil War and the Intervention were all parts of a Peasant Revolution against the bourgeois dictatorship, but the peasants were assisted by the proletariat and guided by its vanguard. If you disagree with "the peasantry" as an answer, could you provide us with an answer without any verbal wrapping and "What would you call it?"-type questions. My reply, I believe I just answered your question as it was answered in prior posts. The problem lies not with my failure to reply but your failure to accept. It just doesnt mesh with what you believe. (3) In relation to the peasantry, I have made the same remarks on its class nature in my e-mails regardless of your misconceptions. One of your misconceptions in understanding what I state as to the class nature of the peasantry and its role in a proletarian revolution My reply, It was not a proletarian revolution so please dont try to slip that through. stems from your making no distiction between the peasantry as a class by itself and "the peasantry" as an ally to the proletarait as the only revolutionary class facing capitalism. My reply, I assume there is a point in there somewhere but its yet to appear. And you have the roles reversed. The peasantry was not an ally to the proletariat; the proletariat was an ally to the peasantry. Remember, it was a revolution by the peasantry, aided and guided by the proletariat, not a revolution by
Re: [MLL]Congo: Imperialists fear the spirit of Patrice Lumumba
Bill Howard wrote: The Guardian February 7, 2001 Congo: Imperialists fear the spirit of Patrice Lumumba President Laurent-Desire Kabila was assassinated on Tuesday January 16 and his son Joseph was installed as President last week. DR KLAUS STEINIGER, editor of Rotfuchs (Red Fox)* gives the background to imperialism's interest in the country and the assassination of its President. Since August 2, 1998, the Democratic Republic of Congo, under President Laurent-Desire Kabila, has been the target of extensive imperialist aggression. Involved are neighbouring Rwanda and Uganda, who wage a proxy war on behalf of the United States, France and Belgium. To-date this has cost the lives of 1.7 million people - 200,000 through direct military action, and 1.5 million (in the wake of the total collapse of health services in the Eastern provinces) from epidemics and hunger. Since its initial colonial subjugation this strategically significant country in the heart of Africa, with its immense riches, has not managed to escape the clutches of imperialism. This became manifest 40 years ago, when, on June 30, 1960, the Belgian "possession" Congo gained its independence, and the first sovereign government of the republic was formed in Kinshasa, the former Leopoldsville. Its left-leaning premier, patriot and anti-imperialist, Patrice Lumumba, immediately became a thorn in the side of the former colonial rulers. He could not hold on to his position for longer than six months. Then, together with his closest collaborators, he was brutally assassinated by mercenaries in the service of the CIA. Others who courageously continued the resistance to Western proxy dictator Mobutu, met with a similar fate. Foremost among them was Pierre Mulele, the Education Minister under Lumumba. He formed a partisan army, but when he was captured by the enemy, he was cut to pieces - alive. Yet the resistance did not yield. In 1996/97 the troops of the resistance traversed Congo, and in nine months of fighting (with Kabila at their head) the American puppet Mobutu was overthrown and Laurent Kabila became President. Kabila said a year later: "We refused to accept masters and patrons. We decided to be ourselves. That was not the country's tradition. However, sovereignty was needed if it was to develop." Initially imperialists welcomed the end of the Mobutu dictatorship in the hope of quickly coming to terms with Kabila. The transnational American super-corporation Bechtel presented a "development plan" for the Congo. Its fundamentals were "respect for the international financial community" and "the exploitation of natural resources". At stake were no less than the world's largest raw material reserves, including gold and diamonds, as well as rare metals such as wolfram and nickel. The Kabila Government refused and submitted to the people its own development plan, pointing out that Congo could produce 20 times as much food as was needed to feed its present population - and that in a country where, today, the average person cannot get more than one daily meal. Such a plan, which presupposed large investments in agriculture, invoked the ire of the imperialist mining giants. By late 1997 the USA had worked out a secret plan for the removal of Kabila. The Rwandan army, which initially supported Kabila, was brought "on side". Suddenly Kabila was accused of having committed "genocide" against the Hutus of Rwanda in the country's eastern part. Assassination plans were prepared against the new President in Kinshasa and then a revolt was launched, firstly in the capital. Congo defended itself and has held out for the past two years. On April 9, 1999, the UN Security Council adopted a resolution whereby "forces which had not been invited into Congo" were asked to withdraw their troops forthwith. The US vetoed the resolution. Its goal was to remove the undesirable politician associated with the Congolese left, who stood against imperialism in the tradition of Lumumba and Mulele. Just as it happened 40 years ago when Lumumba was assassinated. Kabila is not a figurehead of those five American-British mega corporations which have controlled the mining regions since the reign of Mobutu and treat then as their private fiefs. Behind all this stands the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, both of whom extend special lending terms to Rwanda and Uganda. According to Ludo Martens, (Chairman of Belgium's Labour Party who is thoroughly familiar with Congolese problems), writing in the Brussels paper Solidaire: "Without the support of the United States, France, and Belgium two small countries which produce nothing more than tea, coffee, and bananas, would have never dared to attack a huge country of 55 million inhabitants and immeasurable extractive wealth". * * * Thanks to Vera Butler for translation from the German original. Source: Rotfuchs, No 34,
Re: Fw: [MLL]Two Key Overlooked Considerations
Javad Eskandarpour wrote: Comrade Klo, My remarks on your statements: (1) When you state that "It was a peasant revolution led by the proletarian vanguard and assisted by the proletariat which led to the Dictatorship of the Proletariat", It seems that you want to make the proletariat an ally and assistent of the peasantry, not the other way around, in contradistinction to Lenin's ideas; My reply, It was a symbiotic relationship, as neither could have succeeded without the other. Each aided the other. It was a peasant revolt but led to the goals of the proletariat and its vanguard. I feel quite confident that Lenin would concur with my summation. You call it a Proletarian Revolution because you are focusing on the society ultimately established with little concern for those who actually did the fighting, while I call it a Peasant Revolution giving rise to the Dictatorship of the Proletariat, due to the vanguards leadership, because I am focusing on those who actually did the fighting and dying overwhelmingly. also at he same time , you acknowledge that we have a proletarian revolution contrary to your previous claim that "the first proletarian revolution is yet to occur". My reply, Where did I say it was a proletarian revolution? You are the one who keeps making that assertion. I said it was a revolution of the peasantry which was led by the vanguard of the proletariat and assisted by the proletariat. It was not a proletarian revolution, although some misleadingly refer to it as a proletarian revolution because it was led by the proletarian vanguard. As I mentioned earlier in a point I think you missed: Was WWII on the Eastern Front a war between the brains of the operation, Hitler and Stalin and their associates, or between the muscle and masses, the Wehrmacht and the Red Army? How could it have been a proletarian revolution when the proletariats role was dwarfed by that of the peasantry when it comes to numbers and the actual fighting involved? From your perspective one might just as well call it a Womens Revolution because a number of women did some of the fighting and dying and victory led to the emancipation of women in Russia. (2) The concept of "revolution" against capitalism in Marxism-Leninism means the process of a qualitative restructuring of the mode of production through overthrowing capitalism politically and abolishing private property. So, this concept does not mean any generic act of rebelion by x against y, for example, peasantry against capitalism because peasantry does not and cannot qualitatively restructure the capitalist mode of production and abolish private property due to its own foundation. My reply, Now you are replowing the same ground. The peasantry can, and actually did, participate in the abolishment of private ownership. They willingly fought against feudal landlords on the premise that the lands of the latter would be taken from the small minority and distributed to the vast majority. You are again exhibiting this Trotskyist conception of the peasantry in which the latter is totally incapable of supporting collectivization or the abolishment of private property. Not so. As I mentioned in the prior post, the overwhelming majority of the peasants were not kulaks or middle peasants but poor landless peasants who could be persuaded that collectivization was superior to private ownership by each individual member of that class. They fought to take the land from the few wealthy landowners and once that was successful the vanguard needed only convince them that it was in their best interest to collectivize that which had been seized rather than distribute parcels to each peasant individually. In addition, the nature of any revolution is based on the specific mode of production which is declared politically and being established economically, My reply, How a mode of production is declared politically or otherwise has nothing to do with what it is, as that is based on objective conditions. Calling something a duck does not make it a duck. but it is not based on the number of the participants who might come from different classes. So, your questions, like "What class did more to overthrow the Czar and the Provisional government than any other? What class fought the capitalists during the Intervention and the Whites during the Civil War more than any other by far?", are not relevant to the detemination of which class is revolutionary against capitalism, and which class has its dictatorship. My reply, According to you, even though a particular class provided the overwhelming majority of those doing the fighting and dying, it could still not be a revolt by them but by another class. Thats quite a accomplishment dont you think. Can you give me some examples of revolutions in history executed almost completely by members of class A but you consider to
[MLL]reply to Javad
(DISCARD MY EARLIER VERSION AS I ADDED MORE) Javad Eskandarpour wrote: Comrade Klo, My remarks on your statements: (1) When you state that "It was a peasant revolution led by the proletarian vanguard and assisted by the proletariat which led to the Dictatorship of the Proletariat", It seems that you want to make the proletariat an ally and assistent of the peasantry, not the other way around, in contradistinction to Lenin's ideas; My reply, It was a symbiotic relationship, as neither could have succeeded without the other. Each aided the other. It was a peasant revolt but led to the goals of the proletariat and its vanguard. I feel quite confident that Lenin would concur with my summation. You call it a Proletarian Revolution because you are focusing on the society ultimately established with little concern for those who actually did the fighting, while I call it a Peasant Revolution giving rise to the Dictatorship of the Proletariat, due to the vanguards leadership, because I am focusing on those who actually did the fighting and dying overwhelmingly. also at he same time , you acknowledge that we have a proletarian revolution contrary to your previous claim that "the first proletarian revolution is yet to occur". My reply, Where did I say it was a proletarian revolution? You are the one who keeps making that assertion. I said it was a revolution of the peasantry which was led by the vanguard of the proletariat and assisted by the proletariat. It was not a proletarian revolution, although some misleadingly refer to it as a proletarian revolution because it was led by the proletarian vanguard. As I mentioned earlier in a point I think you missed: Was WWII on the Eastern Front a war between the brains of the operation, Hitler and Stalin and their associates, or between the muscle and masses, the Wehrmacht and the Red Army? How could it have been a proletarian revolution when the proletariats role was dwarfed by that of the peasantry when it comes to numbers and the actual fighting involved? From your perspective one might just as well call it a Womens Revolution because a number of women did some of the fighting and dying and victory led to the emancipation of women in Russia. (2) The concept of "revolution" against capitalism in Marxism-Leninism means the process of a qualitative restructuring of the mode of production through overthrowing capitalism politically and abolishing private property. So, this concept does not mean any generic act of rebelion by x against y, for example, peasantry against capitalism because peasantry does not and cannot qualitatively restructure the capitalist mode of production and abolish private property due to its own foundation. My reply, Now you are replowing the same ground. The peasantry can, and actually did, participate in the abolishment of private ownership. They willingly fought against feudal landlords on the premise that the lands of the latter would be taken from the small minority and distributed to the vast majority. You are again exhibiting this Trotskyist conception of the peasantry in which the latter is totally incapable of supporting collectivization or the abolishment of private property. Not so. As I mentioned in the prior post, the overwhelming majority of the peasants were not kulaks or middle peasants but poor landless peasants who could be persuaded that collectivization was superior to private ownership by each individual member of that class. They fought to take the land from the few wealthy landowners and once that was successful the vanguard needed only convince them that it was in their best interest to collectivize that which had been seized rather than distribute parcels to each peasant individually. In addition, the nature of any revolution is based on the specific mode of production which is declared politically and being established economically, My reply, How a mode of production is declared politically or otherwise has nothing to do with what it is, as that is based on objective conditions. Calling something a duck does not make it a duck. but it is not based on the number of the participants who might come from different classes. So, your questions, like "What class did more to overthrow the Czar and the Provisional government than any other? What class fought the capitalists during the Intervention and the Whites during the Civil War more than any other by far?", are not relevant to the detemination of which class is revolutionary against capitalism, and which class has its dictatorship. My reply, According to you, even though a particular class provided the overwhelming majority of those doing the fighting and dying, it could still not be a revolt by them but by another class. Thats quite a accomplishment dont you think. Can you give me some examples of revolutions in history executed almost
Re: Fw: [MLL]Two Key Overlooked Considerations
Javad Eskandarpour wrote: Comrade Klo, You have made two remarks, in relation to the existence of a proletarian revolution, which seem to be contradictory: (1) "And secondly, the first proletarian revolution is yet to occur". (2) " We had a proletarian dictatorship led by the CPSU (the bolsheviks) in which the revolutionary "muscle" was provided primarily, although by no means exclusively, by the peasantry but the leadership and direction were not". So if "the first proletarian revolution is yet to occur", then,now, how do we have "a proletarian dictatorship led by the CPSU (the bolsheviks)"? My reply, Fair question. It was a peasant revolution led by the proletarian vanguard and assisted by the proletariat which led to the Dictatorship of the Proletariat. You are again assuming a revolt by the peasantry can not result in a proletarian dictatorship. Who fought who on the Eastern Front in WWII? Was it a case of Hitler fighting Stalin or did the Wehrmacht fight the Red Army? We both know that it was the latter, even though many people often refer to it by the former. It would be absurd to think that Hitler and Stalin actually fought the war. Yet, what kind of society was created in that part of Eastern Europe the Nazis conquered. Was it one formulated by Hitler and his cronies or by the Wehrmacht? It was the former. And when the Red Army liberated Eastern Europe from fascist enslavement, the societies that arose from that encounter were designed by Stalin and all his allies, not the Red Army. In connection to peasantry, when peasantry acts as a revolutionary ally of the proletariat to overthrow capitalism, this act does not imply that peasantry as a class has become revolutionary in relation to capitalism. This is a misconception. Why? The reason is that peasantry as a class and capitalism are based on private property economically. Thus, if peasantry as a class wants to be revolutionary against capitalism, then it will be against itself in relation to private property, and will be in an impossible position of preserving itself as a class and being revolutionary at the same time. My reply, Not a correct analysis, Javad, because you are ignoring the fact that the overwhelming majority of the peasantry were landless. They were not kulaks or even middle peasants; they were propertyless, not property owners. In fact, a major reason they supported the Bolsheviks and the proletariat in general was that they thought they would obtain the land by taking it from the few who possessed it. I again cant help but note the similarity between your position and Trotskys. I was recently reading a fine book by Lion Feuchtwanger entitled *Moscow 1937* in which he states on page 80, When in the year 1924 Stalin recognized and proclaimed that the Russian peasant had within him the possibility of socialism, that he could, in other words, be national and international at the same time, his opponents laughed at him and decried him as a Utopian. Today [1937] practice has proved Stalins theory to be correct: the peasant has been socialized from White Russia to the Far East. On page 100 he states, Stalin held the opinion that complete and practical socialism could be established without a world revolution, and, moreover, that by the protection of the national interests of the various Soviet peoples, it could be established in one separate country; he believed that the Russian peasant had the possibility of socialism within him. Trotsky disputed that. He declared world revolution to be a necessary condition for the establishment of socialism For the cause, Klo ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
Re: Fw: [MLL]Two Key Overlooked Considerations
Javad Eskandarpour wrote: Comrade Klo, After reading your comments and answers to some of my questions, I have some remarks to make and some questions to ask. It seems that you consider peasantry BY ITSELF as a revolutionary class in opposition to capitalism. My reply, Javad. I dont remember saying that. Could you locate and repeat the quote. I cant think of one revolution in which the peasantry BY ITSELF actively worked for the overthrow of private ownership, be it feudalism or capitalism. If you want to consider peasantry as a revolutionary class in conjunction with the proletariat in the leadership, then peasantry BY ITSELF cannot be revolutionary in the struggle to overthrow capitalism, but can be a revolutionary ally of the proletariat. My reply, Precisely. That was my point. So, what is your unequivocal answer on this point? My reply, I thought I stated it earlier but will repeat my assertion. The revolutions to which I referred were predominantly peasant revolutions in which the far more numerous peasantry was allied with the proletariat and led by the proletarian vanguard, the Communist Party, in such a manner as to bring about a socialist revolution. When you state that "several classes have been revolutionary at one time or another. In fact, at one time the bourgeoisie itself was one of the most revolutionary, most progressive forces on the world scene", your statements are an anwser to another question that I did not ask. My question is as follows: Which class is alone the revolutionary class in struggle to overthrow capitalism since the emergence of capitalism? My reply, You are assuming there is one class alone at all times in the struggle to overthrow capitalism. When allied with the proletariat and led by the proletarian vanguard (Marxist-Leninists organized in a party) the peasantry can definitely be a force working for a socialist revolution. What do you think happened in Vietnam, for example? Are you saying the NLF was composed primarily of proletarians? Surely you jest. What was the size of the proletariat vis a vis the peasantry in Maos China, to take another example? The similarity between the ideology implicitly projected by your questions and Trotskys views on this entire issue are unmistakable. Trotsky put little or no reliance upon the peasantry when it came to establishing and maintaining a socialist society. As far as he was concerned, the next revolution after Marx and Engels spoke had to be an entirely proletarian undertaking if it was to have any chance of success and permanence. He was definitely wrong as subsequent events demonstrated and Lenin and Stalin asserted. I asked you "If the Great October Revolution was not a proletarian revolution, then what was it?" You answer that "It was a revolution of the oppressed of the Soviet Union, the overwhelming majority of whom were peasants, and was led by the proletarian vanguard subsequently known as the Communist Party". It is reasonable to conclude that your answer is not a class-based answer because you do not mention which class dictatorship we had after the Great October Revolution. My reply, i thought I answered that as well. We had a proletarian dictatorship led by the CPSU (the bolsheviks) in which the revolutionary muscle was provided primarily, although by no means exclusively, by the peasantry but the leadership and direction were not. For the cause, Klo ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
Re: [MLL]THE FUTURE WILL BE SOCIALIST OR THERE WILL BE NO FUTURE (fwd)
Bill Howard wrote: - Original Message - From: Alexandra Jost [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2001 4:37 PM Subject: [CubaNews] THE FUTURE WILL BE SOCIALIST OR THERE WILL BE NO FUTURE (fwd) --- Alexandra Alston Jost [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Subject: ADORABLE!!! - THE FUTURE WILL BE SOCIALIST OR THERE WILL BE NO FUTURE Date: Sat, 03 Feb 2001 04:32:30 -0500 ALARCON: "THE FUTURE WILL BE SOCIALIST OR THERE WILL BE NO FUTURE" Porto Alegre, January 30 (RHC)-- Cuban Parliament President Ricardo Alarcon has proclaimed that the future will be socialist or there simply will be no future. Alarcon spoke before a crowd of thousands of delegates to the World Social Forum in Porto Alegre, Brazil over the weekend. The leader of the Cuban Parliament affirmed that Cuba would continue to work for a globalization of solidarity and human values. And Ricardo Alarcon stated that Havana will use every opportunity in international forums to denounce the lies of neo-liberal economic theories. Calling neo-liberal globalization the imposition of Washington's economic theories on the rest of the world, the Cuban Parliament president said that U.S. imperialism is trying to take over the economies of all nations. Alarcon characterized neo-liberalism as the beginning of the end of representative democracy, stating that the wealthy only see consumers and not citizens. The head of Cuba's Parliament noted that in countries dominated by neo-liberal economics, political participation is at an all time low. He said that people don't elect their so-called representatives in those countries, only money does. Speaking at the World Social Forum in Porto Alegre, Brazil, Ricardo Alarcon also mentioned the sad situation of millions of immigrants, legal or undocumented, who are forced to search for better economic opportunities in the wealthy, industrialized countries. And he warned of an increase in human trafficking, especially of women and children. Concerning the planet's future, the president of Cuba's Parliament told delegates that a new world order must and will be socialist. Alarcon said that civilization itself would disappear if we are unable to overthrow the empire and open the way toward more humane and sustainable development models. He predicted that the socialism of the future will be diverse and multicolored, and not come from the imposition of dogmatic theories. And Ricardo Alarcon concluded by saying that "socialism is the perfection of democracy and the realization of humanity's dreams". Good post Bill. Although I am not sure how old Alarcon is, Fidel would do well to closely consider him when he decides to leave the scene in some decade to come and needs a successor. Except for Fidel I can't think of any spokesperson from Cuba over the years who has impressed me more. Che was an Argentinian and I have read very little that was written by Fidel's apparent preference, his brother, Raul. For the cause, Klo ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
Re: [MLL]Two Key Overlooked Considerations
Javad Eskandarpour wrote: Comrade Klo, Certainly, I do not want to "to engage in the ideological equivalent of hit and run" in relation to the points you have made regarding the collapse of the USSR, predictions of Marx and Engels, etc. One reason for not providing a detailed disagreement was to focus on one topic at a time if it is possible. But I will make some relatively detailed remarks on your "Two Key Overlooked Considerations". Your first "Overlooked Consideration" goes as follows (If I am mistaken, please correct me): Marx and Engels just predicted that the ultimate overthrow of capitalism will be accomplished by the revolutionary proletariat, but this prediction does not imply that there will not be other revolutions by other revolutionary classes prior to the ultimate revolution by the revolutionary proletariat against capitalism. If this is what you claim, then I will proceed with the following points. First, if there are some other revolutionary classes against this contemporary capitalism, could you identify them. My reply, Javad. Id be glad to. What class did more to overthrow the Czar and the Provisional government than any other? What class fought the capitalists during the Intervention and the Whites during the Civil War more than any other by far? What class fought American capitalism in Vietnam and what class fought the armies of that American stooge, Chiang kai Shek, in China? What class expelled the Nazis from Albania? On and on the list goes? Hopefully you are not going to claim the central thrust came from the proletariat when it was quite small in Vietnam and China and of lesser importance in the Soviet Union. The class that carried the battle to the enemies was, of course, the peasantry, a class whose importance and critical role in history some people claiming to be Marxists have never seemed to grasp. And no one was more representative of this tremendous misjudgment and oversight than Trotsky who was thoroughly convinced the Russian Revolution could never succeed unless assistance came from additional revolutions in Europe led by the proletariat. He all but discounted the peasantry as a revolutionary force for the establishment of socialism. The clash between him and Lenin/Stalin on this issue went to the very crux of the Revolutions viabiity. In conjunction with what I said earlier, he definitely appears to be one of those operating under the mistaken impression that Marx and Engels were claiming that the next revolutions could only be executed by the proletariat if they were to be successful and no intermediate revolutions by another class were viable. And more importantly, if there are some other revolutionary classes, what are the necessary objective conditions of their emergence as a force against capitalism? In other words, why must these supposedly revolutionary classes other that the proletariat revolt against capitalism? My reply, First, I am referring to one class in particular, not other revolutionary classes. Second, the peasantry is not supposedly revolutionary. It IS revolutionary, unless you want to assume that all their fighting and dying which led to the institution of socialism was for mere appearances sake. Third, Why do they revolt against capitalism? Why does any class revolt? Because they are at the bottom rung of the economic ladder and their condition is not only not improving but becoming worse. The proletariat participated in all of the revolutions I have mentioned. Indeed, the leadership came from the proletariat and the intelligensia. But the proletariat did not contribute the main fighting forces by any means. In all of these countries the proletariat was a relatively nascent class. In addition, according to you Marx and Engels "never said the next revolutions would have to be by the proletariat or that the proletariat was the only revolutionary class at all times". Before proceeding with some brief remarks on your above claim, is there any textual reference for your claim?. My reply, To be sure! Several classes have been revolutionary at one time or another. In fact, at one time the bourgeoisie itself was one of the most revolutionary, most progressive forces on the world scene. No less a source than the Communist Manifesto states: Each step in the development of the bourgeoisie was accompanied by a corresponding political advance of that class. An oppressed class under the sway of the feudal nobility, it became an armed and self-governing association in the medieval commune THE BOURGEOISIE HAS PLAYED A MOST REVOLUTIONARY ROLE IN HISTORY. The bourgeoisie, wherever it has got the upper hand, has put an end to all feudal, patriarchal, idyllic relations. It has pitilessly torn asunder the motley feudal ties that bound man to his natural superiors, The bourgeoisie has disclosed how it came to pass that the brutal
[MLL]Two Key Overlooked Considerations
Two Key Overlooked Considerations Because of events in recent years, especially in light of the dissolution of the Soviet Union, a tremendous number of the worlds Marxists have drawn a profoundly wrong conclusion with respect to what has occurred on the world scene. Many appear to have concluded that the Cold War is, indeed, over and the wrong side has prevailed, and that perception is no doubt strengthened by an immense amount of bourgeois propaganda confirming the alleged final demise of socialism. In truth, that assessment has little to do with reality because of an incorrect comprehension of Marxist ideology and an erroneous conception of world history. Two considerations of tremendous importance have been completely overlooked by millions. First, what did Marx and Engels predict? They stated from the very beginning, in the Manifesto itself no less, that the ultimate demise of capitalism would be brought about through revolution by the proletariat but, and this is the first key point, they never at any time said that there would not be prior revolutions by other classes in the meantime. They never said the next revolutions would have to be by the proletariat or that the proletariat was the only revolutionary class at all times. And secondly, the first proletarian revolution is yet to occur. I would challenge anyone to name one revolution in which not only the leadership but the primary participants in the actual struggle were proletarians. Peasants, not proletarians, comprised those who revolted throughout all the revolutions of the 20th century. Although led by the most advanced elements of the proletariat, the Communist Party, those doing the vast bulk of the fighting and dying were peasants, not proletarians. This is certainly true of the revolutions that occurred in the Soviet Union, China, Vietnam, Cuba, Albania, etc. So what do we conclude from this? Do we conclude that Marx and Engels were wrong as many have alleged? Of course not! We conclude that what they predicted is yet to occur. Instead of comprising the final chapter, everything that has occurred so far has been mere prologue, the opening scenario, foreshadowing what is yet to come. Its as if, in an odd sort of way, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Ho Chi Minh, Fidel Castro, Hoxha and others jumped the gun. Its as if they could not wait for the arrival of a sane society through proletarian activity and, being the intellectuals they were, decided to start the process early with whatever class was most revolutionary at the time. And undoubtedly during their era and in their respective nations that class was the peasantry. But the main event predicted long ago by Marx and Engels is yet to arrive, an upheaval that will be generated and executed by the most revolutionary of all classes, the one growing most rapidly throughout the world, and the only major class that is on a collision course with the capitalist system itself. So mankind has not experienced the summation of modern history but only traversed the prelude. Anyone doubting the accuracy of this synopsis and prognosis would do well to stay around, as the climax is yet to come. For the cause, Klo ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
Re: [MLL]Foreign Ministry Spokesman on Tiananmen Papers
(snip) My reply, What kind of an answer is that? If it is a capitalist country it would not be prohibiting its own media from operating or prohibiting capitalist political parties. === message truncated === The economic arangements are quite obvious. They are the same as those the west has with the rest of the world. The capitalists build factories, exploit the workers and the land, take the products and sell them for their own profits. This is what happens in China. Obviously taxes are payed, and I ask you where are taxes not payed? Paying taxes does not show anything. My reply, I asked you what the rate of taxation is. Do you know for a fact? It could be quite high. I asked you how the profits are divided percentage-wise. Do you know for a fact? I asked you if a certain percentage of the capitalists part of the profits had to be reinvested. Do you know? I asked quite a few questions and all I got was constant repetition. The factories are in Shangai and not in Detroit. WHAT THE..! What kind of a ridiculous statement is that?!? My reply, Well, if China decides to expropriate them, who is going to stop them? Do you imply that the Ford factories in Mexico belong to Mexico and not to Ford?? My reply, Of course not because they can be stopped from expropriating by the US military. You still have this mentality that China is a neo-colony that can be pushed around as easily as Latin American nations. I hope you don't. Is this your bases, the factories are in CHina dn therfore China owns them. My reply, No. My position is that the factories are in China and China can take them whenever she wants to. I think you will agree this is very ridiculous to think. My reply, Whats ridiculous? Are you saying China does not have the power to expropriate the property of foreign nationals whenever she decides to do so. Who is going to stop her. Would you want to take on the Chinese military? I dont think the US is going to go to war with China to retake a Ford plant, especially when they cant take it back to the US anyway. And while Albania may be militarily occupied by NATO, China is economicly occupied by capitalism. My reply, More redundancy to which I have replied ad nauseum. Yugoslavia was a perfect example of how much China is a neo-colony of the west.Their embassy is bombed, and China makes more deals with the west. Some socialism! My reply, Unless you know something I dont, the US paid for the destruction and not very voluntarily I might add. China basically said, pay up or else. And they had some or-elses they could apply. Do you see any Latin American countries making demands like that. Colonies dont make demands; they follow orders. For the cause, Klo ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
Re: [MLL]Foreign Ministry Spokesman on Tiananmen Papers
(snip) === message truncated === Klo, why do you have to engage in pointless arguments about what my web name is. What does it really matter. Can't you find a better argument to criticise me on? My reply, This has always been a side issue with me and you know it, so dont try to paint it as something it isnt in order to put me on the defensive. You conveniently ignore the fact that I even included it as part of a P.S. I don't know how you got the impression that I called myself Comandante Che in this NG. Could someone tell me or Klo when I have ever called myself Comandante Che in this NG?? As far as I know you called me Comandante Che when you visited my site. I thought we agreed to drop this topic, but it seems you are a bit reluctant. My reply, The only names I have seen in your messages in regard to you personally are Commandante Che and Joseph Stalin, neither of which you are. Now why dont you tell me your real name or make up a pseudonym and use it, so we can more on to more substantive issues. And no, I don't disagree with Rafael on when socialism beggun in Russia. He says it was established as a system after Stalin, after the collectivisation and industralisation. This is exactly what Stalin (no, I don't mean me. I think you are smarter not to confuse the two, and certainly claiming that you can't doesn't help your image) said. My reply, Why dont you and Rafael do a better job of identifying who is saying what on your messages. Earlier I attributed to him comments that were being made by you because of nebulosity. As far as this particular point is concerned, it is the only significant one I have found in which my view seems to differ from Stalins. Not long ago I was reading Chuevs interview of Molotov and noticed the latter seemed to have the same problem with Stalins formulation and agreed with me. If socialism was established in the Soviet Union after Stalin or near the end of his leadership, then what kind of system did they have previously. For the cause, Klo PS. Most important: I am still waiting for replies to all those political questions I posed which you have studiously avoided answering. Do you want me to repeat them for the umpteenth time? This is the kind of response I received repeatedly on the Trot NG and is a major reason I left their benightedness. They were quick to attack Soso but evaded offering alternatives or answering queries. Simply stated, the would tell you what they were against but not what they were for. Tomorrow I will try to reply to the post from Charles which is more thoughtful. ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
Re: [MLL]Foreign Ministry Spokesman on Tiananmen Papers
=== message truncated === Joe is speaking to Charles, You make some very exellent points there. I am glad that you see the revisionist and pro-capitalist path the Chinese government is following and that you can see this is certainly not the socialist way. For Tiananmen, I cannot give you any proof of who or what force was leading the peasants and workers in Tiananmen. My reply, Now you are talking. That is what I have been contending and the evidence that is available is to the contrary. Also, you are shifting your focus from claiming China is a capitalist country to proving its leaders are revisionist. As I said several times, although I reject the former I might agree with the latter baring some exculpatory economic data, because even Khrushchov had political restrictions on the capitalists and that didnt exonerate him from being a revisionist. I know that the workers tried to form trade unions to protect their rights, and although Klo and others have made comparisons to Poland, this could also be compared to the Soviets in pre-revolutionary Russia and the struggle of the workers in Malaysia as you have pointed out. I don't know whether it was more closely related to Poland or the Soviets, but seeing that the CHinese government takes the same stand towards its workers and peasants as other Asian neo-colonies do, I can only take an educated guess. No one here can know for sure, since the only source of info we have is the capitalist media, and we don't expect any truth out of there. My reply, That is a good point that we both would do well to note carefully. Our information is filtered and educated guessing is, indeed, involved for both of us. You make a very good point about capitalist "human rights" and "democracy". Many comrades have fallen to these concepts. I know many communists who supported the KLA in its fight against Serbia. But what these comrades don't realize is that the KLA is nothing more than a modern version of the Ballista movement of WW2, a pro-fascist organization which cooperated with the Nazis against the partisans and Jews. The KLA sprang up in the very same villages that the Ballistas hid out into the 50s and 60s. And as we can see the only thing the KLA "liberation war" led to was NATO domination of Kosovo and Albania. My reply, Now are positions are much more compatible. Its hard to distinguish between a genuine communist movement and a phony, Pol Pot type. The main problem is that the communist movements are lacking in leadership and support. This leads to Pol Pot types winning over. The most important thing now is to regain the Soviet Union as a socialist state, a goal that is very reachable. My reply, I like your stance here as well. And if the Chinese Maoists wake up and overthrow the revisionists. That unfortunately is harder to achieve since many comrades like Klo are still fooled by the red flags and banners. My reply, I am not being fooled but I like to gather all the relevant facts before making a judgment, and I am not so naive as to believe they are all on the table with respect to China by any means. Im wary and still open to contrary data. My position is that China: (a) is still a socialist country; (b) is progressively adding more and more capitalistic features with respect to the economy, culture, etc.; (c) is approaching a qualitative leap to capitalism that is unavoidable given the continuing slide into the capitalist morass; (d) is led by people whose policies have the strong scent of revisionism, ala Khrushchov. However, having said all that I am still open to information, especially in the economic sphere, that proves Chinas leaders have a well thought-out plan by which to utilize capitalism to the benefit of socialism while retaining the integrity, dominance and greater growth of the latter. Such a determination is contingent upon a great deal economic data, much of which is classified. Restricting capitalist growth to certain regions is evidence in their favor. However, even this could be nothing more than an attempt by Chinas new capitalists to confine foreign capitalists to certain areas so the former could freely exploit the rest of the nation. Again, a decision with respect to all of this is contingent upon what is shown by all that economic data I keep seeking. I have a list of questions I could pose for anyone on the list to answer that could be of great assistance if accurately answered For the cause, Klo ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
Re: [MLL]Foreign Ministry Spokesman on Tiananmen Papers
(snip) Instead of repeating the same points, why dont we summarize this entire discussion by you answering the following questions. I will approach you as I did the Trots when I was on their NG. 1. How much capitalist activity would you allow in a socialist system and why? Rafael reply, as little as posible specially in the beginin as NEP in Soviet. My reply, You will have to excuse me on this one Rafael because you caused me to literally burst out laughing. There is not a Marxist worth his weight in sea water that would not agree with that comment. The question is: How much is too much. How and when do you make the call? What is your criterion. We all want as little as possible. That is not even an issue. The question is how much is too much. For many even Lenins NEP was definitely too much. 2. Was the Soviet Union a socialist nation from 1918 onward? Rafael Depend what do you mean with socialism. I think the socialism began after Russian Revolution My reply, Based upon Commandante Ches comments I dont think he agrees with you. I was wanting his opinion. but after stalin the socialism was really stablished as system, then the representation of the workers and peasants were mayority in the Communist Patry. And China had had learn a lot of in order to avoid restoration like Tengs made. 3. How would you distinguish a socialist system from a capitalist system? Rafael I ca say depend in which period and in what country. My reply, Huh? I asked for definitions and differences, not examples. Because the extent of development of the socialism were not iqual everywhere. But we must define the concept of socialism according tio Historical materialism socialism is " a transition period between capitalism and communism" My reply, I would agree with your last comment. That is a key point that some seem to miss, especially when it comes to critical aspects of same. but not at all restoration period from socialism to capitalism as Tend did. My reply, If you think Deng turned China into a capitalist country, then I would ask you the same questions I asked Commandante Che. Please note my prior post. 4. Since members of the bourgeoisie were allowed to operate in China Mao ruled, how is he different from Deng? Rafael In Maos period specially untill Lin Piao's death working class and the peasants have had a lot of power against the class enemies. But after Lin piao and Mao Teng and Chou restablished all revisionists purged in the Cultural Revolution in the Communist party and there was no more posibility of controlling and purging all the corrupt cadres if they cooperated with revisionists.After Lin the Chinese exterior politics became pro-fascist and west friendly. And the bureucratical bourgeoisie class captured the power, and restored the antisocialist private property in the economy. Have you forgot the Chinese-Pinochet,Mobuto's, etc good relations and sometime also goog relations with the multinational companies? My reply, I know this is your analysis of the situation and your digression is interesting but I fail to see how you answered my question, so I will repeat it. Since members of the bourgeoisie were allowed to operate in China under Maos leadership, how is he different from Deng? 5. Since you claim the Tiananmen crowd were trying to restore socialism and prevent the installation of creeping capitalism by Deng, why were there no pictures of Marx, Engels, Lenin, or Stalin in the crowd and no Marxist symbols of any significance displayed such as the Hammer and Rafael in the future you will see clearer the real ideology of the mayority of demostrator in the Tiananmen. My reply, In other words you dont have an answer at this time and are merely promising to provide one later. I hope the wait is not too long, as we are all growing older. Now I recommend you not use the personal atacks when you reply to "Joseph" or "comandante Che". My reply, I did not engage in a personal attack. How can you say that? I merely asked a question. He calls himself Commandante Che and Joseph Stalin when, in fact, he is neither. That has an air of presumption about it. Suppose an American told you his name was George Washington and Abraham Lincoln. What would you think? I know there are Christians who call themselves Jesus Christ but Marxists should be above fantasying. If you want notoriety you have to make your own name for yourself, not coopt someone elses. Maybe he hat strong identity with Stalin and Che as my self and it is not bad to dare use the name of the revolutionaries publicly in order to defend them and their ideology. My reply, You are not just
Re: [MLL]Foreign Ministry Spokesman on Tiananmen Papers
(snip) My reply, Here we disagree over how well Chinas economy was doing under Mao. I am not as satisfied as you. But regardless we both appear to agree that without some formidable economic figures clearly demonstrating a critical need for a continuing NEP style program, it is no longer needed. It was never needed in the first place! As I just said above, "Here we disagree over how well Chinas economy was doing under Mao." Based upon the relatively slow economic growth of China from1949 to 1976 in a world of growing, encircling, threatening, and endangering capitalism that is a matter of dispute. China was expanding economically but the pace is another matter. And in this day and age, a slow pace means defeat. Why?? The only logical answer is that he wanted capitalist restoration. My reply, How can you possibly make that assertion in light of present and prior political policies. If Chinas leaders in general and Deng in particular are trying to restore capitalism, then why do they have press censorship of bourgeois propaganda? Why are capitalist political parties outlawed? Why, for instance, is Falun Gong tightly controlled and its demonstrations prohibited. This list can be extended for pages, was posed previously, and is systematically evaded by you. I am still waiting for a reply. You completely ignore the political positions, policies and actions of the Chinese government as if they were insignificant. Your basic contention in this regard has no substance whatever because it would be quite easy for the Chinese leadership to institute a capitalist system should they so desire. Indeed, it would be all too simple were they following in the traitorous path of Gorby. I am in a quandry as to why you persist in maintaining this wholly untenable position. If the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China decided to unleash the capitalists on the Chinese people and legalize all their usual political, social, economic, and religious activities, who would stop them? You say they already have. I say, if say if they already have, then why all the restrictions. As ai said, many capitalist countries have restrictions. What kind of a comment is that and it is the second time you have made it. The obvious difference is that they don't have restrictions on CAPITALISTS AND BOURGEOIS AGENTS. Why would you even make such a silly reply? You said China is a capitalist nation. I said, "If so, then why do they have so many restrictions on what the bourgeoisie can do?" They certainly don't operate unhindered in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union. And instead of answering my question you reply with an immaterial and irrelevant comment. Your "logic" eludes me. But tell me this. If China's leaders are socialist, Did you read what I said earlier. I think not, but I will still repeat it. I said "China" is a socialist nation. I never said the leaders definitely were. Some time ago I said the Soviet Union was a socialist nation until 1991 even though Khrushchov was a revisionist and Gorbachov was a capitalist in socialist clothing. why, why, and again WHY institute a NEP type of policy when none was needed. WHY do they allow capitalist enterprises into China? I thought I answered that but I will reply for a third time. As I just said above, "Here we disagree over how well Chinas economy was doing under Mao." See my answer above. You don't allow capitalist companies to flock into a socialist state and claim to be building socialism. My reply, With that I would essentially agree; but it depends on what you mean by flock. I see no flock or qualitative leap in China, but I do see more than enough encroachment to make me feel very concerned. Well than you are blind. Apparently you heve never gone into a store and seen the labels where the goods were made. Again I am forced to repeat myself. i would like to have access to a lot of economic figures, facts, documents and information before making a determination that China's 1928 has arrived and the reversal of capitalist encroachment needs to begin. And as I also stated earlier, I am inclined to believe, based on what I know at present, that the needed recovery period is now past (a period you deny ever existed) and the growth of capitalism in China should now cease and be steadily reversed. Should that not happen I am left with no alternative but to conclude that the current leadership of China is revisionist and has adopted the program of Bukharin and Gorbachov. However, I am still willing to read or hear any information spokespersons for the
Re: [MLL]More curious messages
Sanjay Singhvi wrote: Comrades, Soon after I sent my previous message titled "Virus" and after the message was already posted onto the list (at least I got it on my server) I got the following message though I have sent no other message: Your mail to 'Marxist-Leninist-List' with the subject (no subject) Is being held until the list moderator can review it for approval. The reason it is being held: Message has a suspicious header Either the message will get posted to the list, or you will receive notification of the moderator's decision. Please will the moderators investigate this and see what is happening? Sanjay I have asked them also and so has Javad. Something is definitely not working correctly. I keep getting this same message also. Klo ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
Re: [MLL]Foreign Ministry Spokesman on Tiananmen Papers
Commandante Che. As a follow up to our dialogue, go to the following websites and tell me what the "Goddess of Democracy" looks like to you. If it is not a copy of the Statue of liberty, then it's certainly a close approximation, and it has been years since I saw it. The message is all too clear. The addresses are: http://www.christusrex.org/www1/sdc/c2a1.jpg http://www.christusrex.org/www1/sdc/p44a.jpg http://www.christusrex.org/www1/sdc/c2a2.jpg I was recently reading the writings of one of the most prominent protest leaders and it was all I could do to retain my lunch. He sounded like a carbon copy of Vaclas Havel in Czechoslovakia with all his talk about installing democracy. What a Trojan Horse! Do you want to read some of their schlock? Incidentally, when you give me those pictures of the supposedly leftist students trying to save China from Deng's creeping capitalism, show me one banner among all those displayed that contains the Hammer and the Sickle or other Communist emblems. Doesn't that strike you as rather odd. Supposedly thousands of Marxists out demonstrating to save socialism and not one banner or emblem extolling Marxism, Leninism, Communism, or socialism. Show me one picture of Marx, Engels, Lenin, or Stalin. And I am still waiting for those photographs showing a crowd containing approximately 1 million people. I hear the talk, and guess who that comes from, but I see no evidence. For the cause, Klo ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
Re: [MLL]Foreign Ministry Spokesman on Tiananmen Papers
Joseph Stalin wrote: --- KloMcKinsey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Commandante Che. As a follow up to our dialogue, go to the following websites and tell me what the "Goddess of Democracy" looks like to you. If it is not a copy of the Statue of liberty, then it's certainly a close approximation, and it has been years since I saw it. The message is all too clear. The addresses are: http://www.christusrex.org/www1/sdc/c2a1.jpg http://www.christusrex.org/www1/sdc/p44a.jpg http://www.christusrex.org/www1/sdc/c2a2.jpg I was recently reading the writings of one of the most prominent protest leaders and it was all I could do to retain my lunch. He sounded like a carbon copy of Vaclas Havel in Czechoslovakia with all his talk about installing democracy. What a Trojan Horse! Do you want to read some of their schlock? Incidentally, when you give me those pictures of the supposedly leftist students trying to save China from Deng's creeping capitalism, show me one banner among all those displayed that contains the Hammer and the Sickle or other Communist emblems. Doesn't that strike you as rather odd. Supposedly thousands of Marxists out demonstrating to save socialism and not one banner or emblem extolling Marxism, Leninism, Communism, or socialism. Show me one picture of Marx, Engels, Lenin, or Stalin. And I am still waiting for those photographs showing a crowd containing approximately 1 million people. I hear the talk, and guess who that comes from, but I see no evidence. For the cause, Klo No, she doesn't look like the statue of liberty. I have seen pictures of her before, and the answer is still no. Let other people see as well. You are repeating what the capitalists said. They compared her with their symbol. I am not repeating what anyone said. I am going by what it looks like to me. The only reason I can see that she has two hands on the torch instead of one is that the creators were not sure one arm would hold it securely enough given the material it was built with. So we will let the readers judge for themselves. I recently read some more writings and commentaries by some of the leaders of the protest and they make it quite clear to me what they were wanting and what they stood for. Read them for yourself. Do you want the site address? I don't have picturs of 1 million people. Nor does anyone else. But it sure gets a lot of talk. Sort of reminds me of those facical figures thrown around about how many died in the Ukrainian famine and Soviet prisons under Stalin's leadership. But I have pictures of people holding up pictures of Mao and other communist banners. If my site was online, you could see one of them. However, if you want me to send you these pictures personally, I will. Shall I?? I will be more than willing. The sooner the better. I hope you are not referring to those pictures of Mao that were already in existence and posted long before the demonstration began. Or maybe you are referring to the small contingent on the fringe, some of whom were counter-demonstrating with posters. For the cause, Klo __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Auctions - Buy the things you want at great prices. http://auctions.yahoo.com/ ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
Re: [MLL]Foreign Ministry Spokesman on Tiananmen Papers
Joseph Stalin wrote: --- KloMcKinsey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Joseph Stalin wrote: --- KloMcKinsey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: "Charles F. Moreira" wrote: Comrades, Spetznaz wrote:- Spetsnaz: I also agree with Alan and Klo. I support both the Chinese government's actions at Tiananmen Square and Yanayev's 1990 coup against Gorbachev. Me too. While the poor farmers may have begun protesting, inspired by the students' protest movement, the protests were led by the students who were clearly demanding Western-style bourgeois democracy reforms and who were backed by Western and pro-Western imperialist and capitalist forces outside China. While in Canada in 1992, I met a young woman who had been a protester in Tianannmen and I thought she was a Canadian-Chinese, since she seemed so Westernised and her views with regards welfare recipients was just like that of any right-winger -- ie. "get trained and get a job" when Canada and the United States were in the depths of an economic recession and there simply were no jobs. Good anecdote Charles. Let's hope Commandante Che reads it. He never has understood the real intent of those protestors at Tian An Mien. They were not fighting for the restoration of Maoism or anything similar as he seems to think. He seems intent on focusing on a small minority. A small minority?? There were more than one million people there. Most of them were peasants and workers, not students. My reply, Where are you getting these figures? Do you have some pictures or aerial photographs of some kind.? I have seen a lot of videos of what happened at Tiananmen, and yes, the majority of what I saw there were peasants and workers. And I am sure there are many pictures on the net (I have one on my site http://redpla.cjb.net) The Students were the most vocal there, they were the first in Tiananmen, and most importantly they were the ones western press showed the most. So most people think that the sudents was all there was to Tiananmen. I went to your website and saw nothing. It went nowhere. You might want to update it. I would be very interested in pictures you may have to make your point. I have seen few. Certainly many of the students were calling for full capitalism, and they were the most vocal there. But that still doesn't change the fact that China is carrying out capitalist restoration and true Maoists there are very much against it. But "true Maoists" were not the central feature of the protestors. For the cause, Klo Incidentally Commandante. Don't you think it is rather presumptuous to call the source of your messages "Joseph Stalin." You are not Stalin unless reincarnation is possible. Oh, Klo, don't take notice at these little details. I am not sure it is so little when you compare yourself to one of the greatest and wisest Marxist-Leninists in history. Do you really think you are up to that billing? Do you really think you follow him that closely and he would agree with everything you have posted? I don't think so. Don't you have qualms about possibly misleading people into believing that you are up to the task. El Comandante Che is my name in my website. I just thought that calling myself Joseph Stalin would tell people more clearly what I stand for. But that is just it. Some of your comments are those with which Stalin would not agree and you are giving people the impression that he would. For the cause, Klo But if you want me to change my "name", than I will. As for reincarnation, well...you never know (just kidding) Furthermore, some of the student protesters who fled to the west have since got good jobs and we don't hear much of them now. It is amazing how mouths of protestors will shut when wealth increases. (snip) Fraternally, Klo __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Auctions - Buy the things you want at great prices. http://auctions.yahoo.com/ ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
Re: [MLL]Foreign Ministry Spokesman on Tiananmen Papers
Joseph Stalin wrote: --- Spetsnaz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Spetsnaz: I also agree with Alan and Klo. I support both the Chinese government's actions at Tiananmen Square and Yanayev's 1990 coup against Gorbachev. The imperialists are willing to do anything to undermine socialism, ranging from "contra" style guerrilla movements to springing up opposition movements disguised as a geniune workers movement. The perfect example is Solidarity. In the 80's they said wanted power to the workers, yet when they were voted into power all they ever did was build churches. Now the Polish people have elected a former Communist party member as president. Even in Romania, in 1989 you saw how the Romanian people were chearing over the downfall of Nicolae Ceausescu. However now, their country is total shit and they want a return to socialism. I wonder how long it will take before the Serbian people admit they made a terrible mistake by deposing Milsovich. Like I said, the imperialists will stop at nothing to destory workers states, and we have to be willinging to use force against these elements. Sadly, its very easy for American capitalism to "bribe" young people in socialist nations with all the luxuries of the West. I'm a teenager myself, and I see first hand how stupid my peers are. "how can you like communism? We have MTV!" "its so cold in Russia, your privates fall off" "but theres no cute guys like N'Sync in Russia" These are actual arguments people at my school tell me all the time. Gees, I could give a much better defense of capitalism. Anyways, during my trips to Russia, I've seen how Russian teenagers are being "americanized". Like young Americans, they're more concerned with MTV than all the poverty in their country. Sadly, it seems only when the true horrors of capitalism becomes clear that these people realize they were wrong, and very often its too late by then. While the older people in Russia remember the oppression of the czars and nazi atrocities, but the younger people didn't experianced anything like that. So that was a big reason why it was easier for the West to try and corrupt the youth. You are absolutely right comrade Spetsnaz. But lets not blame the proletariats for their inactivity. My reply, You mean proletarians dont you. Unless there are leaders to lead the revolution, than the revolution will not happen. Unless Anpilov and others stop courting Putin and Zuganov, than there will be no communist revolution, any time soon. My reply, Dont you mean socialist revolution? You are back on this failure to distinguish communist from socialist. This may not be an important distinction to some, including the bourgeoisie, but it carries a high priority with me. If you dont even know what kind of society you are trying to create you are in a rather poor position to tell someone else his structure is pathetic. But I wouldn't give up on the youth. Once they leave those school desks they will see the real Russia. I don't understand why you and others support Milosevich. He was not a communist, a socialist, heck not even a Trotskyist. He was just another Tito type of leader. My reply, Its not a matter of supporting him. He is a long way from what I would support. Its a matter of preference. Would you rather have him or a Clinton clone? Now it dosen't matter if one capitalist leader is overthrown and replaced by another capitalist leader. My reply, So you wouldnt care if you were living in a country in which Roosevelt were overthrown and replaced by Hitler as the leader? After all they are both capitalist stooges, arent they. Your assertion is a childish, simplistic comment reminiscent of many uttered by Trots. All capitalists are not the same any more than all Christians are the same. The Serbian, Croatian, Bosnian, Albanian and Macedonian people should have realised 10 years ago what sort of game the westerners were playing with them, instead of letting their ultra-nationalism run wild. Yugoslavia was just another chapter in the imperialist tragedy. The good thing is that more and more people in Yugoslavia are realising who is responsible for their country's destruction and 300,000 deaths. The US. And again the question arises, one which has yet to be answered by Klo, where was China through all of this??? If China was truly a socilaist state continuing in the tradition of Mao, why didn't they intervene? My reply, Intervene and do what? What are you advocating specifically? Would you have had them invade? What are you saying they should
Re: [MLL]Foreign Ministry Spokesman on Tiananmen Papers
(snip) Klo says, My reply, We still dont agree on the aims and composition of the Tian An Mien Commandante Che says, Well, there were one million people there, and certainly the students numbered in the thousands. My reply, You keep citing this figure. What is your evidence for its accuracy. You act as if you counted them yourself personally. Do you have some photographs of some kind. I cant help but feel that the capitalists would love to have photographs showing 1,000,000 people demonstrating against Chinas government. I feel quite confident that if such photographs existed they would be plastered into the fact of the worlds masses as often as those pictures of people chopping on the Berlin Wall which make the capitalists drool. The great majority were peasants and workers, not students. Even amongst the students, many were maoists. You are also right that there was a capitalist section there, no doubt about that. My reply, Quite the contrary. I think the great majority were capitalist agents and there was a small socialist contingent. Your NEP argument was very good, except that the NEP wasn't a system to encourage Kulak growth. My reply, You allow kulaks to operate virtually unhindered and thats not encouraging kulak growth? Lenin realised that the Soviet Union wasn't ready for collectivization. Therefore the NEP was a system to allow the present Kulak dominated country side to continue as it was, temporarely. My reply, By allowing it to continue he knew that would foster growth and therefore would not mean that it would continue as it was. No, the Soviet Union of Lenin wasn't entirely socialist. The cities were, but in the countryside the Kulaks still ruled. The differance between the NEP and the Chinese policy is deffenetly one of type and not size. Socialism in China was well established when Deng came along. There was NO NEED for a NEP. And yet Deng instituted one anyway. My reply, Here we disagree over how well Chinas economy was doing under Mao. I am not as satisfied as you. But regardless we both appear to agree that without some formidable economic figures clearly demonstrating a critical need for a continuing NEP style program, it is no longer needed. Why?? The only logical answer is that he wanted capitalist restoration. My reply, How can you possibly make that assertion in light of present and prior political policies. If Chinas leaders in general and Deng in particular are trying to restore capitalism, then why do they have press censorship of bourgeois propaganda? Why are capitalist political parties outlawed? Why, for instance, is Falun Gong tightly controlled and its demonstrations prohibited. This list can be extended for pages, was posed previously, and is systematically evaded by you. I am still waiting for a reply. You completely ignore the political positions, policies and actions of the Chinese government as if they were insignificant. Your basic contention in this regard has no substance whatever because it would be quite easy for the Chinese leadership to institute a capitalist system should they so desire. Indeed, it would be all too simple were they following in the traitorous path of Gorby. I am in a quandry as to why you persist in maintaining this wholly untenable position. If the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China decided to unleash the capitalists on the Chinese people and legalize all their usual political, social, economic, and religious activities, who would stop them? You say they already have. I say, if say if they already have, then why all the restrictions. You don't allow capitalist companies to flock into a socialist state and claim to be building socialism. My reply, With that I would essentially agree; but it depends on what you mean by flock. I see no flock or qualitative leap in China, but I do see more than enough encroachment to make me feel very concerned. You are right, trade with capitalists can be profitable, and is neccessary. You can't survive if you shut off the rest fo the world. But what Deng did was not trade with them, but allow them into China to exploit the people and take the profits. My reply, We covered that a couple of posts ago. You don't think of it as a "qualitative leap" that hundreds of capitalist factories opperate in China, and that the world market is flooded with cheap Chinese made goods?? My reply, No I dont because most of China is still socialist in essence. Kwantung Province, Shanghai, Beijing and some other areas to which investment is confined do not constitute the bulk of China. I think this is sort of different from what Mao had in mind for China. My reply, I would agree. As for Cuba, about 1% of its yearly income comes from foreign investments. My reply, I dare say it is larger than that, especially with regard to the
Re: [MLL]Foreign Ministry Spokesman on Tiananmen Papers
Joseph Stalin wrote: --- Bill Howard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - Original Message - From: Joseph Stalin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2001 4:31 AM Subject: Re: [MLL]Foreign Ministry Spokesman on Tiananmen Papers A small minority?? There were more than one million people there. Microscopic minority, then? Measuredly, Bill. We are not talking the majority of China. The majority of the demonstrators in Tiananmen. Bill. Commandante Che has still not provided corroboration for his oft-repeated 1,000,000 figure, let alone its composition. Fraternally, Klo ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
Re: [MLL]Foreign Ministry Spokesman on Tiananmen Papers
(snip) Unfortunately I have taken my site offline for a while. Maybe that is why you saw nothing Let me know when it is up and running. I want to see the pictures you claim to have. Certainly many of the students were calling for full capitalism, and they were the most vocal there. But that still doesn't change the fact that China is carrying out capitalist restoration and true Maoists there are very much against it. But "true Maoists" were not the central feature of the protestors. For the cause, Klo Incidentally Commandante. Don't you think it is rather presumptuous to call the source of your messages "Joseph Stalin." You are not Stalin unless reincarnation is possible. Oh, Klo, don't take notice at these little details. I am not sure it is so little when you compare yourself to one of the greatest and wisest Marxist-Leninists in history. Do you really think you are up to that billing? Do you really think you follow him that closely and he would agree with everything you have posted? I don't think so. Don't you have qualms about possibly misleading people into believing that you are up to the task. El Comandante Che is my name in my website. I just thought that calling myself Joseph Stalin would tell people more clearly what I stand for. But that is just it. Some of your comments are those with which Stalin would not agree and you are giving people the impression that he would. Well since he is not here, you wouldn't know that, now would you??? I am afraid I would based upon comparing some of your comments with his. Anyway, forget about this and lets get back to the discussion. Sounds good to me. Klo For the cause, Klo But if you want me to change my "name", than I will. As for reincarnation, well...you never know (just kidding) Furthermore, some of the student protesters who fled to the west have since got good jobs and we don't hear much of them now. It is amazing how mouths of protestors will shut when wealth increases. (snip) Fraternally, Klo __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Auctions - Buy the things you want at great prices. http://auctions.yahoo.com/ ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list === message truncated === ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
Re: [MLL]Foreign Ministry Spokesman on Tiananmen Papers
Joseph Stalin wrote: --- KloMcKinsey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Joseph Stalin wrote: Klo Quite false. If Deng and those ruling China today were capitalist, there would have been no Tien An Mien; the Falung Gong would not be restricted in what it could do; multiple capitalist parties would be operating unhindered; press restrictions would not exist, and so on ad infinitum. China, in effect, would be in as sorry a state as present day Russia. Sir, have you ever heard of revisionism?? During Kruschiev there was press restriction, no political parties. My reply, Thats correct and the Soviet Union was still a socialist state, as I have said on numerous occasions. It did not cease being so until Aug. 1991 and the subsequent giving away of the means of Prod. Dist. and Ex. at bargain basement prices. That is true. The Soviet Union was still a socialist state, but a very degraded one at that. And as time went on, it become more and more revisionist. Gorbachiev didn't come out of nowhere. He came out of Kruschiev. This is the case with China. We would all like to see China returning to socialism the way it was laid out by Stalin and Mao. My reply, Fortunately it has not yet left socialism per se. But that futuristic hypothetical meeting of the party to return China back or of some Stalinist leader taking power in China is just wishfull thinking. My reply, If your assessment is accurate, then the demise of socialism in China is no longer a matter of if but when. The only other possible saving-scenario would be for the socialist sector to expand even more rapidly than the capitalist as the pie enlarges. The problem with this approach, however, is that the internal capitalist elements would become increasingly better financed and their politico-economic influence would grow geometrically. I dont see much hope for this strategy but cant help but conclude that it lies at the core of the current program. If the meeting or appearance of a Stalin-style leader are not viable possibilities, then one cant but wonder how long you can simultaneously inject a patient with a poison and its antidote and expect him to endure. Not long I fear. The more realistic outcome, judging from the Soviet Union, is that unless there is a socialist (thank you for correcting my use of communism and socialism) revolution, revisionism will take full control of China, If it hasn't done so already. My reply, It hasnt done so already, but we agree that the trend is definitely a matter of grave concern. You think being a communist is having no freedom, while being a capitalist is having all those freedoms?? My reply, False again. I think of a socialist state as one dramatically restricting bourgeois activities and one in which the basic means of Prod. Dist. and Ex. are owned by the population in general which is what exists in China. Your use of the word freedom without reference to property relationships mirrors the capitalist depiction of same. You have been subtlely indoctrinated and dont realize it. The word freedom should never be discussed without first ascertaining who has the wealth as freedom without wealth is a myth. There is not such thing as a free poor man, I dont care how you arrange the government. The vast bulk of the capitalist world is dirt poor and that tells you how much freedom they have. There are many capitalist countries out there which don't even have bourgeois freedoms. And in China the people don't own the means of production. My repy, To your latter comment I say, False. The bulk of the means of Prod, Dist. and Ex. are still socially owned. Its the trend thats very disturbing. Hundreds of factories are owned by foreign corporations My reply, Many are but most of the means of P, D. and Ex are not. Are you claiming capitalist growth has led to a qualitative leap? That has not occurred yet, fortunately. (here comes the shirt scenario), My reply, What is the shirt scenario? agriculture is not collectivized the way it should be, hell they even allow people to but stock!As you say, no poor person is free. And yet in China the majority of rural farmers are extremely poor. Deng completely ignores the needs of the farmers, and even exploited them. that is why the majority of the people in Tianamne were farmers. Deng reminds me more of Trotsky, completely downplaying the importance of peasants. My reply, We still dont agree on the aims and composition of the Tian An Mien crowd. AH
Re: [MLL]Foreign Ministry Spokesman on Tiananmen Papers
Joseph Stalin wrote: --- KloMcKinsey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: "Charles F. Moreira" wrote: Comrades, Spetznaz wrote:- Spetsnaz: I also agree with Alan and Klo. I support both the Chinese government's actions at Tiananmen Square and Yanayev's 1990 coup against Gorbachev. Me too. While the poor farmers may have begun protesting, inspired by the students' protest movement, the protests were led by the students who were clearly demanding Western-style bourgeois democracy reforms and who were backed by Western and pro-Western imperialist and capitalist forces outside China. While in Canada in 1992, I met a young woman who had been a protester in Tianannmen and I thought she was a Canadian-Chinese, since she seemed so Westernised and her views with regards welfare recipients was just like that of any right-winger -- ie. "get trained and get a job" when Canada and the United States were in the depths of an economic recession and there simply were no jobs. Good anecdote Charles. Let's hope Commandante Che reads it. He never has understood the real intent of those protestors at Tian An Mien. They were not fighting for the restoration of Maoism or anything similar as he seems to think. He seems intent on focusing on a small minority. A small minority?? There were more than one million people there. Most of them were peasants and workers, not students. My reply, Where are you getting these figures? Do you have some pictures or aerial photographs of some kind.? Certainly many of the students were calling for full capitalism, and they were the most vocal there. But that still doesn't change the fact that China is carrying out capitalist restoration and true Maoists there are very much against it. But "true Maoists" were not the central feature of the protestors. For the cause, Klo Incidentally Commandante. Don't you think it is rather presumptuous to call the source of your messages "Joseph Stalin." You are not Stalin unless reincarnation is possible. Furthermore, some of the student protesters who fled to the west have since got good jobs and we don't hear much of them now. It is amazing how mouths of protestors will shut when wealth increases. (snip) Fraternally, Klo ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list __ ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
Re: [MLL]Fwd: J20, Peltier and beyond
Greg Butterfield wrote: This was originally posted on the J20action list. --- Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 16:36:27 -0500 From: "Naomi Cohen Goldstein" [EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: J20, Peltier, and Beyond I'm glad that in the midst of celebrating the wonderful outpouring of protest against Bush on Jan.20, many activists have noted with bitterness and anger the continued incarceration of our Native leader, Leonard Peltier. After more than a quarter century in U.S. dungeons, Leonard is still a political prisoner, as is Mumia Abu-Jamal, and so many others. This should be a lesson to those who still put their faith in the Democratic Party and the racist, oppressive, corporate-owned leaders it holds out for us--like Bill Clinton and Al Gore. Even as we protest the right-wing Bush administration that took office this weekend, and even as we fight the reactionary and hateful appointments like that of John Ashcroft to the Department of Justice, we cannot forget that under the Clinton-Gore administration the Effective Death Penalty Act was passed, speeding up the process of executions and denying death row prisoners habeas corpus rights of appeal. This is one of the reasons why Mumia Abu-Jamal is still on death row after over 18 years. We cannot forget that while Clinton-Gore pretended to be advocates of women's rights, they sponsored the end of welfare payments to millions of poor women and children, and forced on them the so-called Workfare system of semi-slavery. They and their Justice Department, headed by Janet Reno, did nothing to safeguard women's clinics from continued bombings and terrorist attacks and did not stop the assassinations of many of our doctors and healthcare workers who were brave enough to continue to provide abortion services to women who needed them. We cannot forget that after promising to champion gay/lesbian rights, Clinton supported the "don't ask, don't tell" policy which has only deepened the oppression of gay, lesbian, bi and trans people in the U.S. military. He also opposed legislation to help gay and lesbian couples gain many of the rights accorded to married couples. Under his watch, hate crimes like the murder of Matthew Shepherd increased. Even as we protest against the militarization of the government under Bush, we cannot forget that the Clinton-Gore administration continued the murderous sanctions against Iraq, which have killed over 1 million people in that country, due to lack of food and medicine. They have continued, too, the criminal blockade of Cuba, and have laid the basis for a major war against a genuine liberation movement in Colombia, calling the people fighting for freedom from U.S.-imposed puppets, "narco-terrorists." Our movement will never get anywhere if we tie our fate and our struggles to the likes of Clinton-Gore. Even as the corrupt political machine in Florida disenfranchised tens of thousands of African-American voters, Gore didn't have the guts or the will to address the real issue of racism in the voting process--not even to win the White House. And when the Congressional Black Caucus got up in Congress to protest the certification of the Florida electors, NOT ONE Democratic Senator (there are no African-American senators, 140 years after the Civil War) had the guts or the will to stand with them and give them the right to speak. With friends like these, who needs enemies? Our movement will only grow strong in the struggle against the corporate-owned politicians who dominate BOTH the Republican and Democratic Parties. We can't rely on them to free Leonard Peltier, or Mumia Abu-Jamal. Only the people will do that. Let's organize an independent, anti-capitalist movement for social justice at home and against U.S. militarism abroad. Naomi C. International Action Center ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list I might add a few observations of my own in regard to the inaugural protest demonstrations which highlight the duplicity of capitalist propagandists. Just after the election I predicted on this list that several hundred thousand, possibly as many as half a million people would protest the installation of Bush. My prediction appears not only to have been correct but reflect the capitalist assessment of what would occur as well, judging by their own predictions and the size of their police contingents. I recently read one of their papers that said about 1 million were in attendance. The revealing aspects, however, are the following. 1. Who could get within the crowd supporting Bush was carefully monitored with checkpoints and observations. 2. Photographs in the papers were careful to make sure that "crowd pictures" were taken in such a manner as to give the viewer the impression that those attending favored Bush. They were usually taken in such a manner
Re: [MLL]Foreign Ministry Spokesman on Tiananmen Papers
"Charles F. Moreira" wrote: Comrades, Spetznaz wrote:- Spetsnaz: I also agree with Alan and Klo. I support both the Chinese government's actions at Tiananmen Square and Yanayev's 1990 coup against Gorbachev. Me too. While the poor farmers may have begun protesting, inspired by the students' protest movement, the protests were led by the students who were clearly demanding Western-style bourgeois democracy reforms and who were backed by Western and pro-Western imperialist and capitalist forces outside China. While in Canada in 1992, I met a young woman who had been a protester in Tianannmen and I thought she was a Canadian-Chinese, since she seemed so Westernised and her views with regards welfare recipients was just like that of any right-winger -- ie. "get trained and get a job" when Canada and the United States were in the depths of an economic recession and there simply were no jobs. Good anecdote Charles. Let's hope Commandante Che reads it. He never has understood the real intent of those protestors at Tian An Mien. They were not fighting for the restoration of Maoism or anything similar as he seems to think. He seems intent on focusing on a small minority. Furthermore, some of the student protesters who fled to the west have since got good jobs and we don't hear much of them now. It is amazing how mouths of protestors will shut when wealth increases. (snip) Fraternally, Klo ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
Re: [MLL]Nazim Hikmet!
George G wrote: Dear Klo and others, First, I have never said the tactics of the death fast are correct. People in Turkey will decide their own tactics. But you have definitely implied it is acceptable and should be condoned, should those in Turkey so believe. Second, it is about time that we, particularly in the U.S., decide the path to our own revolutionary struggle, and stop first trying to tell everyone else in the world how to run theirs. I am not trying to tell people in Turkey how to run their revolutionary struggle, George, but I am focusing on one tactic in particular which I deem unacceptable, self-destructive, and non-Marxist-Leninist, namely, suicide. Finally, not to be harsh to everyone on the list, but just to whomever it applies to: I am remined of the old rather unfair saying about teachers: "Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach." Today I am afraid that the saying should be reworded (again not to apply to everyone): Those who can, do. Those who can't, send e-mail messages on the Internet. I assume this is referring to me and Javad. Just exactly what is it that you want us to do? What is it that we can't do? If you are referring to voluntarily committing suicide, then I would agree. That is not an option on the agenda. This is all I will have to say on the subject, as I know some people have to have ther last world and will probably reply to this. I am somewhat unnerved by your overall response George, as I denote an aura rarely in evidence. Fraternally, Klo Fraternally, George ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
Re: [MLL]Nazim Hikmet!
George G wrote: Dear Comrade Javad, The point here is quite clearly that Lenin was not only a teacher but a leader. I am sure we all agree on this. On the point about Turkey, I think you might find it a little strange that you are in agreement with Klo here, since, though I respect him on many points, still has the wrong idea that anyone who still flies a red flag is a communist (at least a 51% communist), a view which I think we are both in strong disagreement with. George. When did I ever make a silly comment like that? Fraternally, Klo Fraternally, George PS Sorry, I had said that my previous message would be my last word on the topic. ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
Re: [MLL]Foreign Ministry Spokesman on Tiananmen Papers
Joseph Stalin wrote: Klo Quite false. If Deng and those ruling China today were capitalist, there would have been no Tien An Mien; the Falung Gong would not be restricted in what it could do; multiple capitalist parties would be operating unhindered; press restrictions would not exist, and so on ad infinitum. China, in effect, would be in as sorry a state as present day Russia. Sir, have you ever heard of revisionism?? During Kruschiev there was press restriction, no political parties. My reply, Thats correct and the Soviet Union was still a socialist state, as I have said on numerous occasions. It did not cease being so until Aug. 1991 and the subsequent giving away of the means of Prod. Dist. and Ex. at bargain basement prices. But was he a communist?? My reply, Just because Khrushchov was a traitorous revisionist does not mean the Soviet Union ceased being a socialist nation. The primary factor is not what Nikita was but what the Soviet Union was. You think being a communist is having no freedom, while being a capitalist is having all those freedoms?? My reply, False again. I think of a socialist state as one dramatically restricting bourgeois activities and one in which the basic means of Prod. Dist. and Ex. are owned by the population in general which is what exists in China. Your use of the word freedom without reference to property relationships mirrors the capitalist depiction of same. You have been subtlely indoctrinated and dont realize it. The word freedom should never be discussed without first ascertaining who has the wealth as freedom without wealth is a myth. There is not such thing as a free poor man, I dont care how you arrange the government. The vast bulk of the capitalist world is dirt poor and that tells you how much freedom they have. AH, no.Ever heard of bourgeois dictatorship?? My reply, China is most assuredly not a bourgeois dictatorship. Rafael They don't even make an attempt at even a communist image. Klo No country has ever made an attempt at a communist image. Your knowledge of Marxism could do with some improvement. If you are referring to a socialist image, you are wrong there as well because references to Marxism and socialism are quite in evidence. You know what I mean, god damn it! My reply, For your information I despise profanity and will thank you not to employ it again. One question. Who is Rafael? All this you are quoting is mine. My reply, I went to your web site and discovered that I am not talking to Rafael but Commandante Che, an Albanian. Judging from the way the email was posted I thought Rafael was the source. Anyhow, as you say, Trots carry red banners and pictures of Lenin too. My reply, For sure. On that we agree. Rafael I think these are not slanders. Klo I am afraid they are. You can believe what you want. My reply, And I will, because they are. Rafael The evidence is in every store you go into. Pick up a shirt or a toy or a pen, and see where it was made. Does it say "Made in China"? Most propably. This shows that the Chinese governemtn allows Foreing companies to exploit Chinese people at will for profits in the west. All the sky scrappers in Peking and Shangai are all owned by western companies. All the factories and sweatshops are owned by the capitalists. Klo And your proof for this is what? My proof is that capitalist exploitation has entered into China. Are you blind!?! My reply, Of course it has and its significant introduction worries me greatly. Apparently you are unaware of my prior posts. I have discussed this disturbing trend on many occasions. Rafael Deng returned China to its 19th century status, of shperes of influence. China is again today carved up into shperes of influence. Its a shame and a discrace that China today carries a red flag. Klo You act as if there is no Chinese government of substance and what exists is little more than a puppet of foreign powers. I have little doubt the capitalist powers only wish this were true. The China of today throws far more weight around on the world stage than the Manchus ever dreamed of and there are no internal zones of total foreign domination. I dont think you understand the nature of what the Chinese government is doing. They, like Lenin and Stalin, are using capitalism to build socialism, an admittedly risky adventure. The problem with the present Chinese policies is that they have gone much further down the road than Wow, wow,
Re: [MLL]Nazim Hikmet!
STEVE KACZYNSKI wrote: I thought the DHKC London Information Bureau comrades were wrong to come off discussion lists, including this one, but now I am beginning to understand why they did. I have no intention of encouraging them to embrace "sensible" philosophies. Gorbachev, I suppose, was a "sensible" man. Steve Kaczynski ------- >From: KloMcKinsey [EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: [MLL]Nazim Hikmet! >Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2001 15:53:47 +0800 > >Javad Eskandarpour wrote: > > > Comrade Kaczynski, > > > > The point of my question, relating to Nazim Hikmet's poems, was to >mention > > that Hikmet does not endorse any nihilistic frustration and suicide in >his > > poems. In connection to this , let us hear the great poet himself: > > > > Some Advice To Those Who Will Serve Time In Prison. > > > > If instead of being hanged by the neck > > you're thrown inside > > for not giving up hope > > in the world, your country, and people, > > if you do ten or fifteen years > > apart from the time you have left, > > you won't say, > > "Better I had swung from the end of a rope like >a > > flag"-- > > you'll put your foot down and live. > > It may not be a pleasure exactly, > > but it's your solemn duty > > to live one more day > > to spite the enemy. > > Part of you may live alone inside, > > like a stone at the bottom of a well. > > But the other part > > must be so caught up > > in the flurry of the world > > that you shiver there inside > > when outside, at forty days' distance, a leaf moves. > > To wait for letters inside, > > to sing sad songs, > > or to lie awake all night staring at the ceiling > > is sweet but dangerous. > > Look at your face from shave to shave, > > forget your age, > > watch out for lice > > and for spring nights, > > and always remember > > to eat every last piece of bread-- > > also, don't forget to laugh heartily. > > And who knows, > > the woman you love may stop loving you. > > Don't say it's no big thing: > > it's like the snapping of a green branch > > to the man inside. > > To think of roses and gardens inside is bad, > > to think of seas and mountains is good. > > Read and write without rest, > > and I also advise weaving > > and making mirrors. > > I mean, it's not that you can't pass > > ten or fifteen years inside > > and more-- > > you can, > > as long as the jewel > > on the left side of your chest doesn't lose its > > luster! > > > > May 1949 > > > > Javad > > > > ___ > > Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > To change your options or unsubscribe go to: > > http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list > >A far more sensible philosophy Javad. The poet is to be commended. >Hopefully Kaczynski will take this to heart and spread the advice contained >therein. > >Fraternally, > >Klo > > > KLO states, I don't know to whom you are referring specifically Steve but Gorbachov would be anathema to this list. I would verbally attack him with a vengeance without surcease. He was one of the greatest traitors in human history and all but admits as much in the following interview which exposes him for the rat that he was. And keep in mind that his program was virtually identical to that of the Rightists led by Bukharin and Rykov who were put on trial in March 1938 for treason. Yet people will tell you Stalin and his allies did not know what they were doing when in fact they were right on target and subsequent events have vividly demonstrated as much. 'My Ambition was to liquidate Communism' by Mikhail Gorbachev This is from an interview by newspapers with Gorbachev in Ankara, Turkey where he was a guest at a seminar at the American University. It was published in the 'Dialog' newspaper in the Czech Republic. Courtesy: 'Northstar Compass', Toronto, February, 2000. My ambition was to liquidate communism, the dictatorship over all the people. Supporting me and urging me on in this mission was my wife, who was of this opinion long before I was. I knew that I could only do this if I was the leading functionary. In this my wife urged me to climb to the top post. While I actually became acquainted with the West, my mind was made up forever. I decided that I must destroy the whole apparatus of the CPSU and the USSR. Also, I must do this in all of the other socialist countries. My ideal is the path of social democrac
Re: [MLL]Nazim Hikmet!
Javad Eskandarpour wrote: Mr. Kaczynski, I think you have lost your capacity to think, if you had one. Good luck with your imbecile tunes! Javad Javad. I wonder if Steve would be willing to step in as substitute for those in Turkish prisons whose lives he seems so willing to volunteer for the purpose of martyrdom? Let's see how willing he is to surrender his life through starvation and medical denial. Goodness knows he has no compunction or reservations about surrendering the lives of others. For the cause, Klo - Original Message - From: STEVE KACZYNSKI [EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, January 15, 2001 12:35 PM Subject: Re: [MLL]Nazim Hikmet! > > That poem you mention is on the wall of the room I am in. > But I would rather not get into an argument with someone I don't know over > the Internet just because I post a couple of poems that you do not like. > And I am not calling you comrade. Because except for people from Turkey, > most of the people who call each other "comrade" that I have met actually > hate each other. "Comrade" usually seems to be uttered through gritted > teeth. > > Steve Kaczynski
Re: [MLL]Nazim Hikmet!
George G wrote: Dear comrades and friends, This discussion is getting carried away. As I said before, the question of the tactics of the death fast are not the issue here. George I can't agree. They very much are the issue. When revolutionaries are essentially committing suicide, that concerns me very much and should definitely be an issue. The question is one of solidarity with revolutionaries under attack. Can't agree. We certainly are in solidarity with them as they are attacked but they are adopting tactics that are thoroughly wrong and for that they can, and must be, criticized. There is not a bona fide revolutionary in the world that does not completely sympathize with their plight but that certainly does not mean we must automatically accept any and all tactics they might deem appropriate, especially those entailing their own demise. I will now ask for a third time: Do you know of any bolsheviks in Soviet or pre-Soviet history that employed this tactic? This would seem to be an elementary principle of working-class solidarity and proletarian internationalism. No it is not. You don't automatically accede to what your allies propose simply because they are your allies and you wish to maintain unity. You don't remain silent simply because you don't wish to alienate them. Sometimes you have to tell people what they don't want to hear. It is all well and good to discuss whether certain tactics are appropriate or not in a struggle which we are engaged in, but most of us here are not in fascist Turkey, and none of us on this list are languishing in Turkish prisons. Very true. But this "who are we to judge, we are not in their shoes" stance is not going to alter the fact that "protest by suicide" is an anti-Marxist-Leninist way to proceed. I don't care how much of a Hell-Hole the prisons of Turkey are, and I have no doubt they are among the most hellish, the fact is that our allies confined therein are still alive and that is of paramount importance. Your willingness, like that of Steve, to acquiesce in their self-destruction simply because they prefer it that way I find not only non-Marxist-Leninist but anathema. I am not interested in martyrs; I am interested in victory and you can't win when you are dead. For example, if Palestinian revolutionaries use suicide bombings in their struggle against the Israeli Zionists, it is our obligation as revolutionaries to support the Palestinians and expose the Israelis without getting into a prolonged argument over Palestinian tactics. The situations are by no means analogous and you should be able to see that. Suicide missions to destroy targets that are of tremendous importance to the enemy could possibly be an acceptable military strategy. That would have to be decided on a case by case basis involving trade-offs and volunteers only. Every army in history has assigned individuals and groups tasks that are all but certain to result in death. In the struggle in the 1970s to free the Puerto Rican Nationalist political prisoners, who had shot up the U.S. Congress in the 1950s, no one except the most chauvinist and revisionist elements on the U.S. left would have felt it necessary to criticize the tactics of the Nationalists. Now you are getting even further adrift. This was by no means a suicide mission but involved the "shooting up" of the American Congress. Those who carried out this mission had no intention of being killed or committing suicide. If someone is proposing certain tactics in a struggle in which we are directly involved, then obviously we would have a right and responibility to discuss such tactics. Ah, but you are trying to pre-fix the parameters. They not only have a right and a responsibility to discuss but to criticize and object. For example, there were many discussions of tactics in the civil rights struggle in the U.S., and many, particularly Malcolm X and others, criticized the tactics of "non-violence" and "turn the other cheek" which guided many, including Martin Luther King. But to my knowledge no one on this list has been proposing that we start using the tactics of a death fast in our struggles, so I repeat, these tactics are not at issue here. You say "But to my knowledge no one on this list has been proposing that we start using the tactics of a death fast in our struggles." True, no one on this list is proposing as much but you and Steve are defending them and I view that as a difference without a distinction. Fraternally, Klo Fraternally, George - Original Message - From: Javad Eskandarpour [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, January 20, 2001 8:02 PM Subject: Re: [MLL]Nazim Hikmet! Mr. Kaczynski, You, with your primitive anarchist "philosophy", are not in a position to recommand anything rational to anybody. Good luck with you infantile anarchism too! Javad - Original Message - From:
Re: [MLL]Foreign Ministry Spokesman on Tiananmen Papers
Finally I found time to reply to Rafael --- Bill Howard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Foreign Ministry Spokesman on Tiananmen Papers Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Zhu Bangzao commented Tuesday on the Tiananmen Papers that are reportedly to be published soon in the United States. He said that the Communist Party of China (CPC) and the Chinese government "had already made a correct conclusion about the political disturbances that took place in Beijing at the end of the Spring and the beginning of the Summer in 1989 and that the conclusion would not change." Zhu said that the practice over the past decade and more has proven that the prompt and decisive measures that the CPC and the Chinese government took at the time were "highly necessary to the stability and development of China." He said that the CPC Central Committee, with Jiang Zemin at the core, is united. He noted that any attempt to play up the matter again and disrupt China by the despicable means of fabricating materials and distorting facts will be futile. Comrades we cannot believe the bigest layer and false communist leaders in de actual Chinese Communist Party (CPP) which is more right and fascist dictator party than left. This is the same kind of inaccurate, hyperbolic charge that Adolpho leveled at Cuba. To call present-day China or Cuba fascist is ludicrous and has no place on a Marxist-Leninist list, unless he wants to provide evidence to that effect. Slanders and allegations alone are insufficient. I have concerns about present Chinese policies as well, but they most assuredly don't include accusations of fascism. Rafael I am new to this NG, but I must agree that China's policies are capitalist and even fascist in nature. Klo False. Agree with whom? Certainly not with me because they have socialism with capitalist elements in China, too many in fact to make me comfortable, but socialism nevertheless. And to compare what they have with fascism is absurd. Rafael I do not support that Cuba and its heroic people and leader are called fascists. But Ping and all the other revisionists ruling China today are absolutely, 100% capitalist. Klo Quite false. If Deng and those ruling China today were capitalist, there would have been no Tien An Mien; the Falung Gong would not be restricted in what it could do; multiple capitalist parties would be operating unhindered; press restrictions would not exist, and so on ad infinitum. China, in effect, would be in as sorry a state as present day Russia. Rafael They don't even make an attempt at even a communist image. Klo No country has ever made an attempt at a communist image. Your knowledge of Marxism could do with some improvement. If you are referring to a socialist image, you are wrong there as well because references to Marxism and socialism are quite in evidence. Rafael I think these are not slanders. Klo I am afraid they are. Rafael The evidence is in every store you go into. Pick up a shirt or a toy or a pen, and see where it was made. Does it say "Made in China"? Most propably. This shows that the Chinese governemtn allows Foreing companies to exploit Chinese people at will for profits in the west. All the sky scrappers in Peking and Shangai are all owned by western companies. All the factories and sweatshops are owned by the capitalists. Klo And your proof for this is what? Rafael Deng returned China to its 19th century status, of shperes of influence. China is again today carved up into shperes of influence. Its a shame and a discrace that China today carries a red flag. Klo You act as if there is no Chinese government of substance and what exists is little more than a puppet of foreign powers. I have little doubt the capitalist powers only wish this were true. The China of today throws far more weight around on the world stage than the Manchus ever dreamed of and there are no internal zones of total foreign domination. I dont think you understand the nature of what the Chinese government is doing. They, like Lenin and Stalin, are using capitalism to build socialism, an admittedly risky adventure. The problem with the present Chinese policies is that they have gone much further down the road than was ever contemplated or invoked by Lenin or Stalin. They are engaged in a high-stakes gamble of the first magnitude and have permitted capitalist inroads to a degree that never existed in the Soviet Union. You say they have instituted a
Re: [MLL]Nazim Hikmet!
Javad Eskandarpour wrote: Comrade Klo, Your reply to Kazcinski's irrationalities and George's wrong political stance is correct and to the point, especially in these days (after a great defeat of the world-wide working-class movement) when mindless anarchist movements and pseudo-Marxist-Leninist groups want to "lead" the working-class of the world to an abyss of defeat and agony. Javad Sure can get that impression, can't you. Fraternally, Klo - Original Message ----- From: KloMcKinsey [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, January 20, 2001 7:38 PM Subject: Re: [MLL]Nazim Hikmet! George G wrote: Dear comrades and friends, This discussion is getting carried away. As I said before, the question of the tactics of the death fast are not the issue here. George I can't agree. They very much are the issue. When revolutionaries are essentially committing suicide, that concerns me very much and should definitely be an issue. The question is one of solidarity with revolutionaries under attack. Can't agree. We certainly are in solidarity with them as they are attacked but they are adopting tactics that are thoroughly wrong and for that they can, and must be, criticized. There is not a bona fide revolutionary in the world that does not completely sympathize with their plight but that certainly does not mean we must automatically accept any and all tactics they might deem appropriate, especially those entailing their own demise. I will now ask for a third time: Do you know of any bolsheviks in Soviet or pre-Soviet history that employed this tactic? This would seem to be an elementary principle of working-class solidarity and proletarian internationalism. No it is not. You don't automatically accede to what your allies propose simply because they are your allies and you wish to maintain unity. You don't remain silent simply because you don't wish to alienate them. Sometimes you have to tell people what they don't want to hear. It is all well and good to discuss whether certain tactics are appropriate or not in a struggle which we are engaged in, but most of us here are not in fascist Turkey, and none of us on this list are languishing in Turkish prisons. Very true. But this "who are we to judge, we are not in their shoes" stance is not going to alter the fact that "protest by suicide" is an anti-Marxist-Leninist way to proceed. I don't care how much of a Hell-Hole the prisons of Turkey are, and I have no doubt they are among the most hellish, the fact is that our allies confined therein are still alive and that is of paramount importance. Your willingness, like that of Steve, to acquiesce in their self-destruction simply because they prefer it that way I find not only non-Marxist-Leninist but anathema. I am not interested in martyrs; I am interested in victory and you can't win when you are dead. For example, if Palestinian revolutionaries use suicide bombings in their struggle against the Israeli Zionists, it is our obligation as revolutionaries to support the Palestinians and expose the Israelis without getting into a prolonged argument over Palestinian tactics. The situations are by no means analogous and you should be able to see that. Suicide missions to destroy targets that are of tremendous importance to the enemy could possibly be an acceptable military strategy. That would have to be decided on a case by case basis involving trade-offs and volunteers only. Every army in history has assigned individuals and groups tasks that are all but certain to result in death. In the struggle in the 1970s to free the Puerto Rican Nationalist political prisoners, who had shot up the U.S. Congress in the 1950s, no one except the most chauvinist and revisionist elements on the U.S. left would have felt it necessary to criticize the tactics of the Nationalists. Now you are getting even further adrift. This was by no means a suicide mission but involved the "shooting up" of the American Congress. Those who carried out this mission had no intention of being killed or committing suicide. If someone is proposing certain tactics in a struggle in which we are directly involved, then obviously we would have a right and responibility to discuss such tactics. Ah, but you are trying to pre-fix the parameters. They not only have a right and a responsibility to discuss but to criticize and object. For example, there were many discussions of tactics in the civil rights struggle in the U.S., and many, particularly Malcolm X and others, criticized the tactics of "non-violence" and "turn the other cheek" which guided many, including Martin Luther King. But to my
[MLL]Re: Arne Herløv Petersen's Bookmarks
Per Rasmussen wrote: http://inet.uni2.dk/~herlahp/Ahp_book.htm Per. Who on earth is Peterson and what is his orientation. He certainly must have been energetic to have assembled this humongous list of bookmarks. Some are worth looking into in regard to Marxism. Fraternally, Klo J. V. Stalin Archive Stalin Library Another view of Stalin Introduction to "The Essential Stalin: Major Theoretical Writings, 1905-1952" by Bruce Franklin (Garden City, New York: Anchor Books, 1972), pp 1-38. Preface to "Stalin: Man of Contradiction" by Kenneth Neill Cameron (Toronto: NC Press Limited, 1987), pp. 7-8. The Joseph Stalin Postcards, printed in 1941 Stalin links Dear Dennis! Dear Friend and Comrade! Try this page: Many, many good links - and "just" usefully links... Arne Herlv Petersen the "owner" of the page is an old communist who have been in jail for making spy-works for USSR they said... The link-page is some kind of "links for study" etc. as I see it. I know him as a good fighter from the time under the VietNam-war... and they called him as "stalin-man" when we have hardcore discussion with the trots about the solidarity-work with VietNam. --- Yours in solidarity Per Rasmussen Denmark Familien Rasmussen http://home0.inet.tele.dk/pera/ Cuba SI! http://w1.1559.telia.com/~u155900388/ Viden er Magt! - Magten til folket! http://w1.1559.telia.com/~u155900373/
[MLL][Fwd: Status of Jan 20 demo]
I was sent this by the same group. Klo BULLETIN FROM THE INTERNATIONAL ACTION CENTER (IAC) JANUARY 17, 2001, 5 PM Status of January 20 demonstration and our groundbreaking lawsuit for free speech Attorneys representing the January 20 Counter-Inaugural protesters are awaiting word as to when a hearing will be scheduled on their motion for a preliminary injunction against the "security plan" devised by the Secret Service, DC police and other agencies for the January 20 inauguration and the demonstration that is scheduled to take place at the same time. The lawsuit--"International Action Center, et al, vs. the United States of America"--is requesting a preliminary injunction and was filed Tuesday, January 16 at 2:30 pm in the U.S. District Court. The lawsuit is filed on behalf of the IAC, JAM and other protest groups. The Complaint, the Motion for a Preliminary Injunction and the attached Memorandum can be found at the web site of the Partnership for Civil Justice: www.justiceonline.org (a link to this page can be found on the IAC web site: www.iacenter.org). The lawsuit seeks to strike down the announced "security plan" as constitutionally invalid for a number of reasons (see below). (For the full lawsuit, see www.justiceonline.org.) We are confident that we will prevail in this historic lawsuit. We should remember that we had to first overcome the obstinacy of the police, who did not want to grant us the permit for Freedom Plaza in the first place. Our legal pressure, the mass mobilization of the people and intense media scrutiny forced the government to acknowledge that we indeed do have the legal right to these permits. The lawsuit seeks to strike down other obstacles and impediments placed in the path of our being able to conduct a massive legal, lawful and orderly demonstration. We have already won a tremendous victory. The world media and as a consequence people throughout the world now know that the struggle for free speech is alive and well in Washington DC. Furthermore, a bright light now shines on the Secret Service, the DC police and the Bush administration. Although we do not yet know the outcome of the lawsuit, we do know that people from all over the United States are paying attention to this struggle and that we will have the active involvement of many thousands and the active support of millions who agree with the demonstration but may not be able to personally attend the activity. It is of great importance that thousands of people from around the country are coming to Washington DC on January 20, the first day of the administration of George W. Bush as the 43rd President, to demonstrate opposition to his conservative and right-wing policies. They include Civil Rights organizations, workers' unions, immigrant rights organizations, women's groups, the lesbian/gay/bi/trans movement, and those opposed to U.S. military intervention in the Third World have coalesced into a new progressive movement for social change. It is an irony of history that George W. Bush--an unelected, right- wing politician--upon assuming the presidency, will act as a catalyst- -not for a new conservative era--but on the contrary, for the rebirth of a progressive movement for social justice. The January 20 counter-inaugural demonstration is not merely a single event, but a step in the process towards the rebirth of a new movement for social justice. Bush wants to put Confederates in the cabinet, he wants to roll back workers' rights, affirmative action, Roe v Wade and women's reproductive rights. He wants to give trillions in tax breaks to the already wealthy, he wants to build the National Missile Defense, which is a gigantic subsidy to the military-industrial complex. George W. Bush's real constituency is Big Oil, the big pharmaceuticals, the HMOs and the big war contractors. If allowed, he will fleece the working and poor people in the U.S., for the benefit of the corporate elite. BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON THE LAWSUIT The lawsuit was filed by attorneys from the Partnership for Civil Justice and the National Lawyers Guild on behalf of those who plan to organize protests at the January 20 inauguration. Our lawsuit specifically asserts that the government's current security plan for the January 20 inauguration is "constitutionally invalid." While the National Parks Service was forced to grant us permits to rally at Freedom Plaza (14th St. and Pennsylvania Ave. NW), at the Justice Department (Pennsylvania Ave. between 9th and 10th St. NW), and at McPherson Square (15th and I St. NW), we believe that the Secret Service, Metropolitan police and other government agencies are using the issue of national security as a pretext to inhibit, violate and subvert our constitutionally-protected guarantees to free speech. The
Re: [MLL]Nazim Hikmet!
Javad Eskandarpour wrote: Mr. Kaczynski, You, with your primitive anarchist "philosophy", are not in a position to recommand anything rational to anybody. Good luck with you infantile anarchism too! Javad Javad I think you are getting fairly close to his general philosophy and one can easily see one of the reasons why Marxism has always been in conflict with Anarchism and why Lenin and Stalin both wrote articles denouncing this dangerous, juvenile philosophy. I have an extensive discussion on Anarchism in my book entitled THE RELEVANCE OF MARXISM which can be found on my website at: http://my.ohio.voyager.net/~klomckin Fraternally, Klo - Original Message - From: STEVE KACZYNSKI [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, January 15, 2001 1:20 PM Subject: Re: [MLL]Nazim Hikmet! I thought the DHKC London Information Bureau comrades were wrong to come off discussion lists, including this one, but now I am beginning to understand why they did. I have no intention of encouraging them to embrace "sensible" philosophies. Gorbachev, I suppose, was a "sensible" man. Steve Kaczynski ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
Re: [MLL]Introduction to The Essential Stalin Major Theoretical Writings, 1905-1952 by B
Per Rasmussen wrote: Introduction to The Essential Stalin: Major Theoretical Writings, 1905-52 by Bruce Franklin (Garden City, New York: Anchor Books, 1972), pp. 1-38. I used to think of Joseph Stalin as a tyrant and butcher who jailed and killed millions, betrayed the Russian revolution, sold out liberation struggles around the world, and ended up a solitary madman, hated and feared by the people of the Soviet Union and the world. Even today I have trouble saying the name "Stalin" without feeling a bit sinister. But, to about a billion people today, Stalin is the opposite of what we in the capitalist world have been programmed to believe. The people of China, Vietnam, Korea, and Albania consider Stalin one of the great heroes of modern history, a man who personally helped win their liberation. This belief could be dismissed as the product of an equally effective brainwashing from the other side, except that the workers and peasants of the Soviet Union, who knew Stalin best, share this view. For almost two decades the Soviet rulers have systematically attempted to make the Soviet people accept the capitalist world's view of Stalin, or at least to forget him. They expunged him from the history books, wiped out his memorials, and even removed his body from his tomb. Yet, according to all accounts, the great majority of the Soviet people still revere the memory of Stalin, and bit by bit they have forced concessions. First it was granted that Stalin had been a great military leader and the main anti-fascist strategist of World War II. Then it was conceded that he had made important contributions to the material progress of the Soviet people. Now a recent Soviet film shows Stalin, several years before his death, as a calm, rational, wise leader. But the rulers of the Soviet Union still try to keep the people actually from reading Stalin. When they took over, one of their first acts was to ban his writings. They stopped the publication of his collected works, of which thirteen volumes had already appeared, covering the period only through 1934. This has made it difficult throughout the world to obtain Stalin's writings in the last two decades of his life. Recently the Hoover Institute of Stanford University, whose purpose, as stated by its founder, Herbert Hoover, is to "demonstrate the evils of the doctrines of Karl Marx," completed the final volumes in Russian so that they would be available to Stanford's team of migr anti-Communists. (In preparing this volume, I was able to use the Hoover collection of writings by and about Stalin only by risking jail, directly violating my banishment by court injunction from this citadel of the Free World.) The situation in the U.S. is not much different from that in the U.S.S.R. In fact the present volume represents the first time since 1955 that a major publishing house in either country has authorized the publication of Stalin's works. U.S. capitalist publishers have printed only Stalin's wartime diplomatic correspondence and occasional essays, usually much abridged, in anthologies. Meanwhile his enemies and critics are widely published. Since the early 1920s there have been basically two opposing lines claiming to represent Marxism-Leninism, one being Stalin's and the other Trotsky's. The works of Trotsky are readily available in many inexpensive editions. And hostile memoirs, such as those of Khrushchev and Svetlana Stalin, are actually serialized in popular magazines. The suppression of Stalin's writings spreads the notion that he did not write anything worth reading. Yet Stalin is clearly one of the three most important historical figures of our century, his thought and deeds still affecting our daily lives, considered by hundreds of millions today as one of the leading political theorists of any time, his very name a strongly emotional household word throughout the world. Anyone familiar with the development of Marxist-Leninist theory in the past half century knows that Stalin was not merely a man of action. Mao names him "the greatest genius of our times," calls himself Stalin's disciple, and argues that Stalin's theoretical works are still the core of world Communist revolutionary strategy. Read the rest here: http://www.detroit.freenet.org/~av846/stalin1.html --- Yours in solidarity Per Rasmussen Denmark Familien Rasmussen http://home0.inet.tele.dk/pera/ Cuba SI! http://w1.1559.telia.com/~u155900388/ Viden er Magt! - Magten til folket! http://w1.1559.telia.com/~u155900373/ ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list Excellent post Per. Stalin had it basically correct when all is said and done and millions are going to pay, and are paying, a horrendous price to discover the accuracy of his
Re: [MLL]Nazim Hikmet!
Javad Eskandarpour wrote: Comrade Kaczynski, The point of my question, relating to Nazim Hikmet's poems, was to mention that Hikmet does not endorse any nihilistic frustration and suicide in his poems. In connection to this , let us hear the great poet himself: Some Advice To Those Who Will Serve Time In Prison. If instead of being hanged by the neck you're thrown inside for not giving up hope in the world, your country, and people, if you do ten or fifteen years apart from the time you have left, you won't say, "Better I had swung from the end of a rope like a flag"-- you'll put your foot down and live. It may not be a pleasure exactly, but it's your solemn duty to live one more day to spite the enemy. Part of you may live alone inside, like a stone at the bottom of a well. But the other part must be so caught up in the flurry of the world that you shiver there inside when outside, at forty days' distance, a leaf moves. To wait for letters inside, to sing sad songs, or to lie awake all night staring at the ceiling is sweet but dangerous. Look at your face from shave to shave, forget your age, watch out for lice and for spring nights, and always remember to eat every last piece of bread-- also, don't forget to laugh heartily. And who knows, the woman you love may stop loving you. Don't say it's no big thing: it's like the snapping of a green branch to the man inside. To think of roses and gardens inside is bad, to think of seas and mountains is good. Read and write without rest, and I also advise weaving and making mirrors. I mean, it's not that you can't pass ten or fifteen years inside and more-- you can, as long as the jewel on the left side of your chest doesn't lose its luster! May 1949 Javad ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list A far more sensible philosophy Javad. The poet is to be commended. Hopefully Kaczynski will take this to heart and spread the advice contained therein. Fraternally, Klo ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
[MLL]Assassinations
Rafael says, But it is sorry to know revolution such as Lin Piao (murdered ) and Chem Po ta (purged from the CCP) disappeared when Mao was still alive. My reply, Are you alleging Lin Piao was murdered and you can prove who did it? Incidentally, if we can freely offer our opinions as to who was murdered or assassinated I might as well submit some of my own. I suspect that Huey Long, Will Rogers, Franklin Roosevelt, John Kennedy, Bobby Kennedy, Martin Luther King, George Lincoln Rockwell, and John Lennon, were all assassinated by agents of the ruling class because of their political views, teachings, actions, or potential actions and I feel confident that Stalin was murdered by Beria and some of his accomplices. At one time I was of the view that Beria was eliminated because he and his supporters were trying to prevent the switch from Stalin's way (Marxism-Leninism) to Khruschev revisionism but additional information has convinced me that Beria should have been removed from any positions of importance years earlier. He was a rogue in a class by himself and was disliked almost universally. Can I prove these suspicions? No! But I'll bet some top secret CIA and FBI files can corroborate many. Try as I may when it comes to world history, especially Soviet and sociaiist history, I can't help but think of that old adage (with my modifications): History is written (and hidden) by the winners (at least the temporary winners). For the cause, Klo ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
Re: [MLL]Assassinations
Rafael says, But it is sorry to know revolution such as Lin Piao (murdered ) and Chem Po ta (purged from the CCP) disappeared when Mao was still alive. Klo replies, Are you alleging Lin Piao was murdered and you can prove who did it? Incidentally, if we can freely offer our opinions as to who was murdered or assassinated I might as well submit some of my own. I suspect that Huey Long, Will Rogers, Franklin Roosevelt, John Kennedy, Bobby Kennedy, Martin Luther King, George Lincoln Rockwell, and John Lennon, were all assassinated by agents of the ruling class because of their political views, teachings, actions, or potential actions and I feel confident that Stalin was murdered by Beria and some of his accomplices. At one time I was of the view that Beria was eliminated because he and his supporters were trying to prevent the switch from Stalin's way (Marxism-Leninism) to Khruschev revisionism but additional information has convinced me that Beria should have been removed from any positions of importance years earlier. He was a rogue in a class by himself and was disliked almost universally. Can I prove these suspicions? No! But I'll bet some top secret CIA and FBI files can corroborate many. Try as I may when it comes to world history, especially Soviet and sociaiist history, I can't help but think of that old adage (with my modifications): History is written (and hidden) by the winners (at least the temporary winners). For the cause, Klo Klo Continues. While we are at it I have a couple of other analyses I might as well get off my mind because they have been banging around in there for years and I just can't shake them. First I can't help but note that Stalin was murdered approximately 6 weeks after the quasi-fascist Eisenhower administration took office during the height of the Cold War. In light of the fact that the Rosenbergs were executed only a few months later in defiance of world opinion by order of the newly installed ultra-rightists, my suspicions are that the latter either assisted in "removing" Stalin or actually engineered it. The prior president, Truman, actually dealt with Stalin on a personal basis and I don't think he could bring himself to actually order the murder of a man so powerful in world affairs. The ultra-rightists, however, had no such reservations as is shown by what they did to the Rosenbergs. And second, I see a similar scenario as having occurred in the switch from the Carter to the quasi-fascist Reagan administration. I can't help but note that Brezhnev died (or was it murdered) shortly after the Reagan gang came to power. But even more enlightening is what happened afterward. He was replaced by Andropov who died shortly thereafter, who was, in turn, replaced by Chernenko who also died shortly thereafter. And then came Gorbachov who met no such fate. Now doesn't that look suspicious? And what do I suspect? Well, I have difficulty avoiding the conclusion that the capitalists developed some method by which to kill an individual while making it look as if the death were natural. I also think the method is so top-secret that it is rarely used out of fear of discovery. But in this instance, I think the new thugs on the block concluded the stakes were just too high not to employ its talents. Another Brezhnev as General Secretary of the CPSU was simply not going to be allowed after the set-backs the capitalists had experienced in Vietnam and the 1970's in general. In effect, the crypto-fascist Reagan administration decided that they were going to kill each and every Soviet leader until one took power whom they wanted or was acceptable. They could not pick the choice but they could sure remove each one they found anathema. It was a program which the Carter administration refused to initiate but fostered within the Reaganites, like the Eisenhower crowd, no qualms. Again I would be extremely interested in reading CIA, FBI, DIA and other top secret files in this regard. Frankly, I don't think I am as off-base as may appear at first sight to some. For the cause, Klo ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
Re: [MLL]CUBA'S IDEA OF DEVELOPMENT IS SOCIALISM, NOT PRIVATIZATION
Bill Howard wrote: *CUBA'S IDEA OF DEVELOPMENT IS SOCIALISM, NOT PRIVATIZATION Havana, January 9 (RHC)-Cuba's Minister for Foreign Investment and Economic Cooperation, Marta Lomas said, Monday, in Havana that the island will only do business with those firms that are of interest to the country. She added that foreign investment in Cuba represents between three to four per cent of the country's Gross Domestic Product, confirming that the island's policy is not aimed at privatization nor the application of neoliberal methods, but the development of a socialist economy. Good info to post Bill, Klo During an analysis made by the Ministry for Foreign Investment and Economic Cooperation at the end of the year 2000, Marta Lomas pointed out that Cuba currently has cooperative relations with about 100 countries, including almost all of Latin America, the Caribbean and an important part of Africa. ___ ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
Re: [MLL]HELMS SAYS U.S. NOT BOUND BY ABM TREATY
Bill Howard wrote: - Original Message - From: Global Network Against Weapons Nuclear Power in Space [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, January 12, 2001 4:25 PM Subject: HELMS SAYS U.S. NOT BOUND BY ABM TREATY Thursday January 11 Helms Says U.S. Not Bound by ABM Treaty By Tabassum Zakaria WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The influential chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee said on Thursday that the United States was not bound by an arms control treaty that Russia has said would be violated if a missile defense were deployed to protect the United States and its allies. Sen. Jesse Helms, who will be going into his seventh year as head of the committee, said the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty (ABM) expired when the Soviet Union dissolved and should not be an impediment to a U.S. missile shield. ``The United States is no longer bound by the ABM Treaty -- that treaty expired when our treaty partner the Soviet Union ceased to exist,'' said Helms, a North Carolina Republican. ``Personally, I do not think that a new ABM Treaty can be negotiated with Russia that would permit the kind of defenses that America needs and must have,'' he said in a speech at The American Enterprise Institute. President Clinton deferred a decision on whether to deploy a national missile defense system to President-elect George W. Bush, who takes office on Jan. 20. Russia and China have opposed a U.S. national missile defense, saying it could lead to a renewed arms race. Donald Rumsfeld, Bush's choice for defense secretary, said at his confirmation hearing on Thursday the United States must develop defenses against missile attack. But he refrained from setting any date for deployment. Helms said his top priority would be to undo Clinton's endorsement of a treaty to create the first permanent global court for trying alleged war criminals. Some Republicans are concerned such a court could lead to a foreign country putting members of the U.S. military on trial. ``I will make reversing this decision and protecting America's fighting men and women from the jurisdiction of this international kangaroo court my single highest priority in the new Congress,'' Helms said. Bush's team has criticized the treaty as flawed and said that Bush would not send it to the Senate for ratification in its current form. The International Criminal Court would be set up in the Netherlands to try individuals accused of mass murders, war crimes and other gross human rights violations. The tribunal would not come into force until 60 countries ratify the treaty, and so far almost half that number have done so. Helms said he intended to work with the Bush administration to ensure that the Baltic states of Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia would be invited to join NATO, an expansion that Russia opposes. ``We must show Russia's leaders an open path to good relations, while at the same time closing off their avenues to destructive behavior,'' Helms said. He said he hoped more action would be taken to undermine foreign leaders such as Cuban President Fidel Castro and Iraqi President Saddam Hussein. ``We must have a new Iraq policy, and such a policy must be based on a clear understanding of this salient fact: Nothing will change in Iraq until Saddam Hussein is removed from power,'' Helms said. He advocated a new U.S. policy on Cuba, saying debate over whether to lift the economic embargo against the communist-ruled island was likely to end with a Bush White House which supports keeping it. Helms said the types of policies that undermined communism in Poland could also be applied to Cuba. On Taiwan, Helms said the island's self-defense capabilities were not keeping up with China's military modernization and it was ``imperative that we act quickly to reverse the decline.'' Anyone who knows the American political scene is fully aware of the fact that Senator Jesse Helms of North Carolina is unquestionably one of the most prominent leaders of the most rabid, most fascistic wing of the national government. He is the quintesssential example of everything that is rotten in the capitalist system and always has been. And here we have him vomiting his reactionary spewtum before a meeting of the American Enterprise Institute, the most prominent and heavily-financed, right-wing "think tank" which works diligently to generate an image of objectivity. For the cause, Klo Bruce K. Gagnon Coordinator Global Network Against Weapons Nuclear Power in Space PO Box 90083 Gainesville, Fl. 32607 (352) 337-9274 http://www.space4peace.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
Re: [MLL]Maoism vs. Marxism-Leninism!
Javad Eskandarpour wrote: Comrade Klo, I agree with your view that "the current differences are not much but in this case they are enough to warrant marching in the streets. The clear message of all leftists should be: We are not supporting Gore; we are opposing a crypto-fascist takeover by the Bushites". And this "marching in the streets" is a political lesson and a first step towards the smashing of the capitalist state machine and its replacement by the proletarian state. In other words, these political demonsrations must be viewed and directed as political lessons towards "enrolling" in school of communism, not as political games in school of the patch-work liberal capitalism. Javad Javad Demonstrations should, indeed, be used to heighten political awareness rather than act as band-aid on a system that itself needs replacement. The liberal approach is definitely not the way to proceed, although, unfortunately, millions of American proletarians are not thinking along those lines and do not realize the degree to which the class struggle is the linchpin about with all issues revolve. For the cause, Klo ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
Re: [MLL]Foreign Ministry Spokesman on Tiananmen Papers
rafael altez wrote: --- Bill Howard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Foreign Ministry Spokesman on Tiananmen Papers Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Zhu Bangzao commented Tuesday on the Tiananmen Papers that are reportedly to be published soon in the United States. He said that the Communist Party of China (CPC) and the Chinese government "had already made a correct conclusion about the political disturbances that took place in Beijing at the end of the Spring and the beginning of the Summer in 1989 and that the conclusion would not change." Zhu said that the practice over the past decade and more has proven that the prompt and decisive measures that the CPC and the Chinese government took at the time were "highly necessary to the stability and development of China." He said that the CPC Central Committee, with Jiang Zemin at the core, is united. He noted that any attempt to play up the matter again and disrupt China by the despicable means of fabricating materials and distorting facts will be futile. Comrades we cannot believe the bigest layer and false communist leaders in de actual Chinese Communist Party (CPP) which is more right and fascist dictator party than left. This is the same kind of inaccurate, hyperbolic charge that Adolpho leveled at Cuba. To call present-day China or Cuba fascist is ludicrous and has no place on a Marxist-Leninist list, unless he wants to provide evidence to that effect. Slanders and allegations alone are insufficient. I have concerns about present Chinese policies as well, but they most assuredly don't include accusations of fascism. The proof is that they are building open capitalism. So was Lenin under NEP and so was the Soviet Union in the late 1920's but one snowflake does not mean winter has arrived my friend. You have not proven that they have made sufficient quantitative changes to cause a qualitative leap. I fail to see dialectical thought in your "reasoning." In Sweden we have seen some documental programmes in TV about the forces in the protest in the Tiananmen square. The youngsters expressed openly among another things the sympathy for the great Cultural revolution. The overwhelming majority expressed sympathy for policies that would have signaled the end of socialism in the China. They were not fighting for socialism; they were fighting for the restoration of capitalism under the guise of "liberty." Remember that statue they created in the image of the capitalist Statue of Liberty. They were the Trojan Horse and the capitalists knew it. When capitalists use their favorite phrase "human rights" you should automatically know that that means "allow bourgeois agents and ideas to run loose." They are synonymous. Make no mistake about that and don't be fooled by their deceptions and masks. But it is sorry to know that the most important figures of the Cultural revolution such as Lin Piao (murdered ) and Chem Po ta (purged from the CCP) disappeared when Mao was still alive. Are you alleging Lin Piao was murdered and you can prove who did it? To read Henver Hoxas book Reflexions on China is very clear and illustrating. Hoxha's book is good and is a major reason I have reservations about the current Chinese policies. And how to explain the protection of the fascist Teng Siao Ping Now you are back on this nonsense again. As I said many posts ago, Deng had to use force to prevent a policy, a policy which he and his allies helped institute by the way, from causing the overthrow of socialism in China. I hold him and his allies responsible for events that ultimately culminated in the gathering at Tien An Mien but he made the right decision when the army was employed. Had he followed a more responsible policy from the beginning, the events at Tien an Mien would never has occurred to begin with. by the CPP and even Mao? My theory is that when Lin Piao was murdered was also a coup against the left forces. And Mao very old and sik was just manipulated by Teng and his supporter. I think that comrades as Lin Piao without clear counterrevolutionary antecedents must be rehabilitated att least as exemplar comrade despite the real traitors in the CPP accused as traitor. greetings Rafael. Would you please provide some evidence to support this accusation of murder? And murdered by whom? For the cause, Klo ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
Re: [MLL]Maoism vs. Marxism-Leninism!
Javad Eskandarpour wrote: Comrades, "Maoism vs. Marxism-Leninism" and "The international Zionism"as possible topics of discussion on this Marxist-Leninist list seem to have met with a great "enthusiasm" , unlike some forwarded liberal news pieces which induce a good hibernation amidst the terrible stormy days! In view of this "enthusiasm", I will begin discussing some myths, presented as historical and theoretical truth, in the limits of the above topics. Javad Javad If by liberal news pieces you are referring to my forwarding of some articles regarding demonstrations against the installation of crypto-fascists to lead the American government, it may surprise you to learn that I agree with your assessment. They were, indeed, liberal news pieces and I pondered at length whether or not they should even be sent to this list. Demonstrations are not going to prevent the takeover, but what is the alternative. Not demonstrate at all. Just acquiesce and provide a kind of passive acceptance without remonstrance. No, I think demonstrations do bring pressure to bear on those in power and the greater the crowd the stronger the message. Those taking over should know they have no mandate and will be opposed at every level. I went through the change from the Carter to the quasi-fascist Rotten Ronnie Reagan administration and there is a difference in who is in charge. I could feel it throughout the entire 8 miserable years. The current differences are not much but in this case they are enough to warrant marching in the streets. The clear message of all leftists should be: We are not supporting Gore; we are opposing a crypto-fascist takeover by the Bushites. Stated in stark terms: I dislike that capitalist agent Roosevelt immensely, but if it is a choice between him and Hitler, I will hit the streets, because I totally despise the latter. For the cause, Klo ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
[MLL][Fwd: Update from IAC re: Jan. 20 Counter-Inaugural demonstration]
I was recently sent this email. For the cause, Klo Update from International Action Center regarding January 20th Counter-Inaugural Demonstration NEW NEWS AND MOBILIZATION UPDATE We have distributed more than 50,000 flyers for the January demonstration. We have another 50,000 flyers and several thousand more posters that will be going out in the next week. The combination of mass organizing (directly outreaching to working class communities with leaflets, stickers, posters) and a high level of media coverage have contributed to a surge in this mobilization. The IAC web site and linked sites (mumia2000.org) has experienced an unusually high volume of visits. People have been downloading the flyer (from the muimia2000.org site) and reproducing it with a local address and phone contact. Official organizing centers that are arranging transportation for local people have now been established in nearly 40 cities (see IAC web site for listings.) We are also producing a new piece of literature in bulk entitled: "Eleven Reasons to Protest Bush's Inauguration on January 20." This will be produced as a brochure for mass distributions and literature tables (see following email). UPDATE ON TACTICS We have applied for permits for January 20th in four areas - along the route of the Inaugural parade. The reasons we have applied for the permits are to allow for the participation of the maximum number of people who agree with the demonstration's goals. We have the right to assemble and exercise basic free speech prerogatives. The inauguration is a "public event" and Pennsylvania Avenue is not the private property of those who support the death penalty and admire George Bush and his right-wing policies. It frequently takes weeks to be notified that a permit has been secured. Of course, the police would be glad to grant permits for areas far away from the inaugural route. But we know that thousands of people are coming to demonstrate AT THE INAUGURATION, not in some remote location. The incoming Bush administration and the police agencies are functioning in tandem. They hope that a large number of people will not turn out to protest the president-select. We are at the beginning or early stage of a new movement for social justice. The political establishment, over the past year, has embarked on a strategy of trying to sabotage this movement by means of physical repression and demonizing demonstrators in the mass media. The goal is to scare away and intimidate potential supporters of the movement. The Bush administration and the police realize that the January 20 demonstration has enormous potential and that people are mobilizing all over the east coast and midwest to come to Washington. The police are trying to create a climate of fear around the demonstration. Again, they are attempting to portray the demonstrators as "violent." Thousands of people who are angry about racism, the death penalty, Mumia Abu-Jamal's case and racist disenfranchisement should not feel like they are risking life and limb simply to express their First Amendment rights. We are telling everyone to repudiate this calculated scare campaign by the police. Every profound social movement has encountered a similar problem, including the civil rights and anti-war movement of the 1960's. The labor movement's efforts to unionize the unorganized always encounter the problems of intimidation, fear and disinformation. If the movement reacts with confidence, maturity and determination these problems can be overcome. The best, and only, answer for our new movement is to mobilize larger and larger numbers from the population who reject racism, voter disenfranchisement, capitalist globalization, the US war machine, sexism, homophobia and the wanton disregard of the environment. The corporate elite has the money and police power behind them. But our movement speaks for the tens of millions of working people, of oppressed people - of the disenfranchised - who have no stake in the current system. Can we do it? Can we make January 20th another stepping stone toward the creation of a genuinely mass movement? That is up to each and every one of us. The goal now should be to organize, organize and organize. Our power is in the people, the mobilized people! This is what imbues us with optimism and provides a compass for all of our strategies and tactics. P.S. - We will keep people posted on the status of the permits, logistics, housing, etc. in the next week. In terms of securing our permits, we are being assisted by an extremely able legal team. are confident that our rights will be upheld. In the meantime, let's stay focused on mobilizing the largest possible number of people so that the January 20th counter-inaugural demonstration reaches its potential. International Action Center 39 West 14th Street, Room 206 New York, NY 10011 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] web:
Re: [MLL]Growth cycle in U.S. economy exhausted
Bill Howard wrote: Growth cycle in U.S. economy exhausted * Could drag the world into a global crisis of the capitalist system * Cuba would not be so affected because it is the least connected to the financial hypertrophy, according to Osvaldo Martínez, speaking at the 5th Congress of the Economists Association of Cuba BY RAISA PAGES (Granma International staff writer) THE orgy of speculation and consumption manifested by the U.S. economy during the last eight years is becoming exhausted and economists are asking if the landing will be a smooth or rough one, according to Osvaldo Martínez, speaking at the 5th Congress of the Economists' Association of Cuba (ANEC). The dollar, the favorite refuge of speculative capital, has turned the United States into the center of international financial hypertrophy, Martínez explained, and a crisis in that nation would submerge the world in a global conflict of the capitalist system. A business slump is forecast in the United States. The share price index of technological enterprises quoted on the stock market has lost half its level and indexes for the manufacturing economy have fallen for the fourth month running, noted the Cuban expert, who heads the Economic Affairs Commission of the National Assembly of People's Power. The savings rate in the United States has remained negative for the last 10 years. The purchase of stocks represents one and a half times the real disposable income in U.S. homes and debts are acquired from buying hyper-inflated shares on the stock markets, Martínez continued. Banks lend money on the basis of guarantees in shares, which leaves the system highly exposed, given that everything depends on high stock market quotes. The abruptly increased trade and current account deficits in the United States are other clear signs of a future crisis. Martínez went on to demonstrate that an increasing dependence on the absorption of capital flows from countries with a surplus is becoming more and more obvious in the U.S. economy. The sum of U.S. shares in the hands of foreigners amounts to $6.5 trillion USD, approximately equivalent to 79% of the U.S. gross domestic product. The number of poor people in the United States stands at 17% of its population, and it is estimated that 20% are functional illiterates. In terms of world consumption, 86% of consumer spending is in the hands of 20% of the population, while the remaining majority of the planet's inhabitants only have access to 14%. Neoliberal policies are creating a situation of social non- sustainability by exacerbating poverty at a global level, polarizing incomes (the super-rich and the super-poor) and shrinking the capitalist system's productive base. A global economic crisis is being incubated days before the beginning of the third millennium, Martínez affirmed and, as a general outline of what could occur, he mentioned a sudden fall in the price of basic commodities, including oil; and a contraction of trade, investment and production on a world scale. Speaking of the repercussions of such a crisis on the Cuban economy, the expert stated that the island has earned itself a doctorate in resistance in the last 10 years, and that it also is the least connected to international financial hypertrophy. "We have nothing to fear from capital flight or speculative runs in the exchange rate." Dialoging with other economists, Martínez agreed that the island would feel the effect of falling prices for basic commodities and the reduction of international trade, while warning that this is "getting into unknown waters." The 5th ANEC Congress was attended by 400 delegates and invited guests who, divided into commissions, heard special speeches from the ministers of economy and planning, finance and prices, tourism, agriculture, basic industry, education and domestic trade; and the president of the Central Bank of Cuba. Pretty astute analysis. With tens of millions of Americans living in a world divorced from reality in so many ways, there can be little doubt that what the United States needs at this time above all else is a Depresssion, not a Recession but a Depression, a Depression in which millions are thrown out of work, prices plummet, bankruptcies skyrocket, the prices of bonds and stocks collapse, foreclosures and repossessions dramatically increase and a whole host of other negative capitalist-generated events descend on the nation like the poisonous cloud that creaped over the land of Egypt when the pharaoh would not let the Israelites escape their bondage. That would do infinitely more to awaken the American people to how bourgeois society actually operates than all the teaching and preaching thousands of leftists could ever accomplish in a lifetime. There is nothing like a fall from riches to rags to drastically alter one's philosophy of life. Because ideology is a reflection of material
Re: [MLL]LAW Society assassinations report.
Bill Howard wrote: - Original Message - From: solidarity_palestine [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, January 01, 2001 8:18 PM Subject: [solidarity_palestine] LAW Society assassinations report. From: "Lawsociety" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Israeli army continues violations in the Palestinian Territories Fatah leader killed in West Bank 1 January 2001 Forty-nine-year-old Thabet Thabet, Secretary General of Tulkarem's Fatah branch was killed in the West Bank city yesterday morning. Palestinian eyewitnesses reported that at 9:30 am, an Israeli military unit hiding in a truck opened fire at Thabet as he reversed his car, shooting him at least six times. He died in Tulkarem hospital at 10:30 am. Eyewitnesses also reported that a nearby Israeli-registered car sped off after the attack and a military helicopter was hovering overhead. According to LAW's documentation, Thabet is the eighth Palestinian victim of targeted assassination. The others were Hussein Abyat (37), Jamal Abdul Razik (30), Ibraheem Bani Auda (34), Anwar Hamran (28), Yusif Sawi (28), Abas Awiwi (26 ) and Hani Abu Bukra (32). According to some commentators, these killings may well amount to extra judicial executions, which is strictly prohibited under international law. Further, some commentators have argued that the onus is on the Israeli authorities to apprehend those they deem a risk to their security, and not to resort to a policy that has as its rationale, intentional physical elimination. (snip) Israel is the most obvious country in the world whose government deliberately sends out "hit squads" to "terminate with extreme prejudice" (an old Vietnam term) their opponents. I can vividly remember it flying a military hit team almost the length of the Mediterranean Sea to Tunisia to kill a man right in front of his family and sending a team to Beirut, Lebanon to do the same to another Palestinian opponent. The Israeli government is ruthless and I would not be surprised at any act it commits. The Israelis scream incessantly about how the Nazis blasted them with utter ruthlessness during WWII and apparently now feel they have a license to treat the Palestinians with a similar attitude. They stole Palestinian lands in 1948 and even more in 1967, expelled most of the inhabitants, and now claim biblical passages in a 3,000 year old book provide sufficient justification. Not by a long ways! For the cause, Klo ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
Re: [MLL]Preparations to attack China from space...
(Snip) The vote in favor was 160, virtually all the member nations of the United Nations. Three countries abstained: the United States along with Israel and Micronesia. (Snip) American imperialists and their mouthpieces love to call certain countries "rogue states." What someone or some group needs to do is compile and post a list of all the United Nations votes that have occurred in the last ten years clearly showing the United States and a couple of its puppets voting against virtually the entire world. 160 versus 3, 180 versus 2, etc. votes are becoming more and more common. Such a compilation should vividly demonstrate beyond any question who is, and who is not, the "ROGUE STATE" on this planet. For the cause, Klo ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
[MLL][Fwd: Find organizers in your area for Jan. 20 in DC!]
The anti-fascists are doing what needs to be done--organizing. When crypto-fascists take over by undisguised theft and blatant partisanship, it's time to protest. Millions will sympathize. Moreover, with the United States as evenly divided as it is, without the abolishment of the electoral college we could go through this entire travesty four years from now. For the cause, Klo MANY ADDITIONAL ORGANIZING CENTERS FOR THE JANUARY 20 PROTEST AT BUSH'S INAUGURATION! *Find the organizing center nearest you--or start one in your city! (There are many additional centers since the last email-- they are listed alphabetically by state.) If there's no one listed near you, consider being an organizing center. You could organize transportation to DC, or to the nearest major city to get on their buses. Either way, if you let us know your plans, we can post them so others can find you. If you're already organizing, let us know because every day people all over the country are calling and emailing the IAC looking for local organizers! Serving as an organizing center in your area would mean working with other people and groups in your city, school, community, place of worship, union or workplace to bring people to DC on January 20. Organizing tools are available. We would list you on the IAC web site as a local contact and could direct people in your area to you. Below is a partial list of organizing centers. Email [EMAIL PROTECTED] with your local contact info if you or your group can serve as an organizing center. Information will be listed on the IAC and other web sites, and email notices will be sent out periodically. NATIONAL OFFICE -- NEW YORK CITY 39 W. 14th St. #206, New York, N.Y. 10011 (212) 633-6646; Fax (212) 633-2889; email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WASHINGTON DC office 733 15th Street NW, #515 Washington, DC 20005 Phone 202-588-1205, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] DELAWARE *U of Delaware contact Nick Galasso [EMAIL PROTECTED], (302) 753 - 6463 GEORGIA *ATHENS car caravan leaves Friday evening, January 19 contact Michael Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED], (706) 613-7443 *ATLANTA Millions for Mumia bus leaves Friday night, Jan. 19, tickets are $70 (770) 989-2536, [EMAIL PROTECTED] ILLINOIS *CHICAGO International Action Center c/o PO Box 06178 Wacker Dr. Station Chicago, IL 60606-0178 (773) 381-5839, [EMAIL PROTECTED] KANSAS MISSOURI *KANSAS CITY, KS/ST. LOUIS, MO area Jamie Smith @ [EMAIL PROTECTED] MARYLAND *BALTIMORE All People's Congress 426 E. 31st St., Balt., MD 21218 (410) 235-7040, [EMAIL PROTECTED] MASSACHUSETTS *BOSTON International Action Center phone: 617-522-6626 fax: 617-983-3836 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] web: http://www.iacboston.org MICHIGAN *ANN ARBOR University of Michigan Contact Julie Frye [EMAIL PROTECTED] *DETROIT Millions for Mumia/International Action Center 5920 Second Ave., Detroit, MI 48202, 313-831-0750, [EMAIL PROTECTED] NEW HAMPSHIRE *DOVER Contact David Diamond 603-749-9159, [EMAIL PROTECTED] NEW JERSEY *BERGEN COUNTY Contact Tim Egan [EMAIL PROTECTED], 201-507-0243 *HACKENSACK-NEWARK-MONTCLAIR-NEW BRUNSWICK- PRINCETON New Jersey Copwatch, PO Box 330, Rochelle Park, NJ 07662 Tel. #s 201-487-3748, 973-443-9293, 908-684-2474 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] NEW YORK *BUFFALO IAC and Workers World 716-855-3055, [EMAIL PROTECTED] 349 Niagara St., Buffalo, New York 14201 *MID-HUDSON REGION (914) 255-5779; email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *NEW YORK CITY 39 W. 14th St. #206, New York, N.Y. 10011 (212) 633-6646; Fax (212) 633-2889; email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *ROCHESTER 716-436-6458, [EMAIL PROTECTED] NORTH CAROLINA *CHAPEL HILL U of North Carolina-Chapel Hill Contact Judy Freimark from SURGE [EMAIL PROTECTED], 919-914-2816 *CHARLOTTE The Uprise Collective [EMAIL PROTECTED] *RALEIGH NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY, Amnesty International chapter Contact Aaron Jacobs (919) 829-4942, [EMAIL PROTECTED] OHIO *CLEVELAND Peoples Fightback Center 3030 Euclid Ave #LL1, Cleveland OH 44110 216-426-0851, [EMAIL PROTECTED] *KENT Kent, Ohio Kent Student Anti-Racist Action (SARA) [EMAIL PROTECTED], (330) 672-3767 PENNSYLVANIA *PHILADELPHIA International Action Center 215-724-1618, 813 S. 48th St., Phila., PA 19143, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] International Concerned Family and Friends of Mumia Abu- Jamal 215-476-8812 *SCRANTON/DICKSON CITY Contact Amy Prorock @ [EMAIL PROTECTED] RHODE ISLAND *PROVIDENCE International Action Center (401) 726-4802, [EMAIL PROTECTED] TEXAS *HOUSTON Texas Death Penalty Abolition Movement Phone: 713-861-5965, office 713-521-0629 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bus from houston is $125.00--deposits due by Dec. 26,at our office: Abolition Movement C/o SHAPE Center 3903 almeda Rd. Houston, TX 77004. Bus leaves SHAPE on Thursday evening at 6 PM, Jan. 18. Returns Sunday night, Jan. 21.) VIRGINIA *RICHMOND Richmond Action Center P.O.B. 14602, Richmond, VA 23231 Phone: 804-358-0236 or 804-644-5834 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WASHINGTON, DC International Action
Re: [MLL]Korean Central News Agency Dec 21
Alan Dover wrote: Klo comrade, your reply to the bourgeois statement: "ardent patriotism that should be placed above any ideology." is mine also. As you point out: " NATIONALISM AND PATRIOTISM SHOULD ALWAYS BE CONSIDERED SUBORDINATE TO SOCIALISM." just as all bourgeois nations are all subordinate to the rule of capital. There is no such thing as nationalism above or without class ideology. Socialism rejects and replaces bourgeois nationalism with socialist internationalism. The message is, as you say 'subversive' and seeks to subject a united Korea to the rule of capital. fraternally Alan. How right you are Alan and I only hope the North Korean leadership receives the same message by one means or another. And if they already have, one can only hope they heed its serious, very serious, warning. Traps are being laid for them now that they have opened the door to capitalist influence. I have no problem with the door being opened to trade, investment, exchanges of technical expertise, employment of foreign technicians etc.; that occurred under both Lenin and Stalin; but I have a tremendous objection to adopting the other side's philosophy. It is one thing to be among them; it's another to become one of them. Simply stated: The trick is to be among them but not of them. Fidel Castro is the quintessential example of one who has successfully and intelligently performed this balancing act for decades. He puts on a business suit when conditions warrant and meetings with capitalists are on the agenda; but dons those army fatigues when he wants people to know where his real beliefs lie. Reminds me of Lenin making deals with Armand Hammer, the CEO of Occidental Petroleum. Fraternally, Klo National reunification should be achieved independently by the efforts of the Korean nation under all circumstances. Koreans can certainly pool their will and efforts to achieve independent reunification. Though the north and the south have the differing ideologies and systems, nothing is dearer to the Koreans responsible for reunification than ardent patriotism that should be placed above any ideology. GOOD GRIEF NO! WHAT BLASPHEMY! Patriotism, nationalism, and a sense of national unity should definitely not be placed above ideology. That is nothing more than a surreptitious formula for surrender and catastrophe. Makes me wonder who is propagating this nonsense. Marxism-Leninism should always receive top consideration and be at the head of the implimentation agenda. NATIONALISM AND PATRIOTISM SHOULD ALWAYS BE CONSIDERED SUBORDINATE TO SOCIALISM. In essence, someone is trying to tell the North Koreans to scrap socialism if that is what it takes to achieve a unified peninsula. NATIONAL UNIFICATION AT ALL COSTS is a ridiculous and clearly subversive message. If surrendering socialism is necessary in order for the peninsula to be united, then may the division continue indefinitely. Ideology is, and should always remain, foremost in the minds of all Marxist-Leninists. For the Cause, Klo ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
[MLL][Fwd: Washington Post article on January 20 protest]
I just received the following article via the Internet. Today (Thursday, December 21), there was a very successful press conference in Washington DC covering the January 20 protest at Bush's inauguration. It was covered by every major media, including AP, UPI, Reuters, every local DC tv and radio station, the Washington Post, a network that distributes to Spanish speaking tv, and it will be played in full on C-SPAN at 7:09 pm (EST) for 50 minutes (on C-SPAN 2). At 5:30 pm (EST) on Inside Politics on CNN will have a live interview with Brian Becker, co-director of the International Action Center, speaking on the January 20 protests. Following is an article that appeared today in the Washington Post (page A-10): WASHINGTON POST Thursday, December 21, 2000; Page A10 Election Anger Fuels Inaugural Protesters By David Montgomery and Arthur Santana Washington Post Staff Writers The raw wounds left by the presidential election finale have created enough irritation to unleash one of the largest inauguration protests in years, according to veteran organizers and police officials. "This will be by far the biggest counter-inauguration since the 1973 Nixon counter-inauguration," predicted Brian Becker, co-director of the International Action Center in New York, who has demonstrated at numerous presidential swearing-in events. "We organize protests not infrequently, and we know when something has legs and when it doesn't have legs. This one does." At the second inauguration of President Richard M. Nixon, police estimated there were 25,000 to 100,000 demonstrators, including some who threw fruit and stones at Nixon's car. The total crowd was about 300,000. D.C. police are expecting about 750,000 people on Jan. 20 when President-elect Bush is sworn in, and they said they think many demonstrators will be content to voice their displeasure peacefully. Becker's group, like several others hoping to flood parts of the city on Inauguration Day, had been planning to be in Washington no matter who won the election. But enough people think the outcome was illegitimate, he said, that it has cranked up protest passion. Within hours of the Dec. 12 U.S. Supreme Court decision blocking Vice President Gore's effort to recount votes in Florida, Becker and other organizers said, their Web sites were deluged with inquiries. "There's a tremendous amount of spontaneous organizing going on," said Becker, 48. A rainbow of left-leaning groups had planned to rally on the Mall to vent outrage at a variety of demons, including racism, the death penalty and the corporate influence on politics. But complaints that some Florida votes were not counted, including those of many African Americans, have given demonstrators powerful common issues. Unlike the street protests against the World Bank in April, no civil disobedience has been planned, organizers say. They said the demonstrations will feature signs, chants, giant puppets, skits and a squad of radical stilt walkers being trained in Philadelphia. "We are not planning to shut down the inauguration," Becker said. "We are planning to make it plain that the inaugural route is not the private property of those who support the death penalty, so we're going to be well-represented on that parade route." D.C. police aren't taking any chances with protesters' intentions, according to Executive Assistant Chief Terrance W. Gainer. He said he expects fewer than 5,000 unruly demonstrators might try to disrupt the inauguration, along with thousands of peaceful demonstrators. In addition to the D.C. force, thousands of suburban and federal officers will participate in what officials described as an unprecedented level of security. The Justice Action Movement, an alliance of Washington area protesters, yesterday sent D.C. Police Chief Charles H. Ramsey a letter requesting a meeting to discuss plans for peaceful protests. Cmdr. Michael Radzilowski, who is in charge of special operations, said yesterday that he would be happy to meet with the protesters. Half a dozen groups have requested permits, but none have been granted. A National Park Service spokesman said the agency is waiting for inauguration planners to make final arrangements before it allots space to protesters. The National Organization for Women plans to be there. "It's important for our own spirit to let people know there is a place to plug in, take that anger and use it to fuel some additional activism," NOW President Patricia Ireland said. The Rev. Al Sharpton and the Rev. Walter Fauntroy plan a "shadow inauguration" outside the U.S. Supreme Court to swear in those pledging to uphold the Voting Rights Act. "We feel the act was violated by George Bush," Sharpton said. Fauntroy, pastor of New Bethel Baptist Church in Shaw, said he has witnessed every swearing-in since President Franklin D. Roosevelt's fourth in 1945, and "I know of no inauguration that has been the
[MLL]Additional Comments Regarding the Election
Apparently the following came from Radio Havana Cuba > >*US ELECTORAL SYSTEM MORE QUESTIONABLE NOW THAN EVER BEFORE > > > >The combination of the electoral and the popular vote results, as well as > >the antics of the U.S. mainstream media to announce the new president-elect > >without the official results, turns the ridiculous U.S. electoral system > >into a balancing act. > > > >Tuesday's elections and the confusing results bring about a logical end to > >an electoral show. The whole farce was seen on television and the INTERNET > >while the important issues and ideas were totally lost. > > > >The campaign to point out the defects, real or imagined, of their rival was > >George W. Bush and Albert Gore's only way to be different from the other > >candidate. They have similar positions on many issues and most of their > >positions lack any social content. > > > >Election Day results showed the existing contradiction between the electoral > >votes and the only ones that should really count: the popular vote. > > > >Tuesday's elections also point to the disproportionate role of the Electoral > >College -- 538 votes that have enough power to ignore the opinion of the > >majority. > > > >The vote re-count in Florida has ended up creating an atmosphere of anxiety > >and uncertainty among not only the U.S. people but also abroad. The > >frivolity with which the American mainstream media approached the electoral > >campaign reached its peak on Tuesday when well-known TV anchors had to > >apologize for announcing the new president-elect before the official results > >were in. > > > >In the final analysis, Tuesday's presidential elections showed how > >vulnerable the U.S. system is, despite Washington's self-proclaimed "model > >of democracy." > > > >(c) 2000 Radio Habana Cuba, NY Transfer News. All rights reserved. > > OVER A MONTH AGO ON NOVEMBER 14TH I POSTED THE FOLLOWING OBSERVATIONS AND WOULD LIKE TO FOLLOW THEM WITH EVEN MORE COMMENTS. MY ANALYSIS OF THE ELECTION What intrigues me is the degree to which the American ruling class has inadvertently navigated itself into a serious imbroglio brought on by the collision of two major weaknesses within the American electoral system. First are the antiquated and sloppy methods by which people vote in the United States, many of which are easily manipulated, vulnerable, and deceptive. This has easily fostered cries of theft, corruption, bribery, and graft, many of which, of course, are true. Second is the utterly undemocratic method (even by bourgeois democratic standards) employed to elect the President of the United States. Instead of simply totaling up all the votes in the nation and giving the office to whomever received the most, the American ruling class injected into Article II of the United States Constitution a method by which to make the ruling class the actual determinant of who really will be .president. They did this in order to prevent the masses from voting in someone unacceptable to the ruling class, someone who advocates, for example, a massive redistribution of the wealth. The plan was, and is, relatively simple. Instead of simply totaling all the votes, the only sane, bourgeois democratic way to proceed, the arrangement is follows. In the capitalist United States Congress each of the states (50 of them) has two senators regardless of its population, which totals 100. Each of the states has 1 representative for every 500,000 people (approximately), so the numbers of representatives vary widely from state to state depending on population, California having the most. The total number of representatives from all states is 435 and the total number of senators is 100. Now comes the absurd part. In order to elect the president each state is given electors and the number given is determined by adding that states representatives to its senators. The state of Florida, for example, has 2 senators and 23 representatives which totals 25. So Florida has 25 electors. That means the Democrat party must pick 25 people to represent it and the Republican Party must pick 25 people to represent it. Now who do you think they would pick? Why the most loyal, of course. The highest officials in the Party, usually the most powerful and influential. Now comes the main election and all the votes are counted. If the democrat candidate for president receives the most votes for president in Florida, for example, that means the 25 democrat electors go to vote on December 18th for the president of the United States. The Republican electors dont vote for anything. If the Republican candidate for president gets the most votes, then the 25 Republican electors get to vote for the president on December 18th and the Democrat electors vote for nothing. It is an undemocratic all or nothing system. You get them all or none; nothing is proportional. So what does this mean in effect, First, it means 538 electors (435 + 100 + 3 more) are the ones who really elect the President of the
Re: [MLL]DHKC London Information Bureau request to unsubscribe
Siddhartha Chatterjee wrote: Klo McKinsey wrote: Instead of having spent your time criticizing those whom you feel did not lend you support, why didn't you devote your efforts to the more productive activity of suggesting and providing methods as to how support could be provided. You were quick to criticize but slow to offer concrete suggestions of what could be done by those thousands of miles away. We all support those to whom you refer who are being repressed in Turkey; so what do you suggest we do about it that is of a tangible, concrete, potent, effective, character. And until something more positive is offered, I suggest you pull in your horns and cease attacking what few allies you have. Moreover, I would ask you: What are you going to do of a concrete nature to express your anger over the illegal seizure of the American Presidency by a gang of crypto-Fascists and reactionaries. Even though you are probably in Europe thousands of miles away, I expect the same kind of concrete support that you are demanding. Your more-Marxist-than-thou attitude is unacceptable. We all have very limited resources. The above piece by Klo McKinsey is truly shameful. The shameful aspect lies in your attempt to make those who can't do anything of concrete significance, but yearn to do so, feel terrible and believe that they are somehow aiding a totally rotten government that should have been extinguished years ago. With friends like these, who needs enemies? With morale assistants like you, who needs right-wing critics. Klo, where is your integrity as a human being (leave alone Marxism about which you have written a book)? Where is your integrity and suggestions as to concrete actions. Let's face it my friend, we are all frustrated at what is being done all over the world, especially in Turkey, but nothing is to be gained by merely attacking allies for their alleged indifference. No one is more concerned with the plight of the leftists, especially the Marxist-Leninists in Turkey, than I. But, again, what CONCRETE AND EFFECTIVE actions do you want me to perform. I will tell you the same thing I told dkc. Until you are ready to offer some realistic suggestions as to what should and can be done, then stop denigrating, demeaning, and vilifying those who support your cause completely. If it were within my power I would march into Turkey and institute a wholesale housecleaning of its political leaders and an expropriation program second to none. You would not recognize the place in no time at all. You think that solidarity is something like a commodity that has an exchange value? You have read all the Marxist tomes and this is the end result? Would you care to elaborate on what appears to be a subliminal slander. I fail to see any commodity aspect to my comments. At this late juncture, did you have the decency to at least sign the letter (formulated by Sven) to the Turkish government protesting its heinous action against the prisoners? This action is surely against international law and the UN Convention of Human Rights. Please let us know. Your coldness is baffling. I have no problem with signing any letters, but is that the best suggestion you have. Where is the effectiveness in that approach when the best in Turkish society are being murdered. What do you think the Turkish government or any of their allies are going to do with that letter when they receive it. Moreover, the government of Turkey is doing nothing more than is being done by scores of governments throughout the world. Just ask Amnesty International. Do you suggest that I spend my days writing and signing letters of protest that more than likely will be ignored and let it go at that. And what other actions do you suggest we engage in? If this letter sounds somewhat ascerbic that is only because it is. I am becoming somewhat peeved at people trying to make me feel bad and guilty for not doing that which I can't do to begin with. If I could alter the behavior of Turkey's government, I would have done so long ago. Of that there is no doubt. Better yet, I would love to alter the government of Turkey, period, but then, again, that also applies to the bulk of the world's governments. For the Cause, Klo Sid ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
[MLL]The election travesty
This was sent to me by someone who appears to be a lawyer and contains more truth than humor. Attributed to Mark H. Levine, Attorney at Law. Q: I'm not a lawyer and I don't understand the recent Supreme Court decision in Bush v. Gore. Can you explain it to me? A: Sure. I'm a lawyer. I read it. It says Bush wins, even if Gore got the most votes. Q: But wait a second. The US Supreme Court has to give a reason, right? A: Right. Q: So Bush wins because hand-counts are illegal? A: Oh no. Six of the justices (two-thirds majority) believed the hand-counts were legal and should be done. Q: Oh. So the justices did not believe that the hand-counts would find any legal ballots? A. Nope. The five conservative justices clearly held (and all nine justices agreed) "that punch card balloting machines can produce an unfortunate number of ballots which are not punched in a clean, complete way by the voter." So there are legal votes that should be counted but can't be. Q: Oh. Does this have something to do with states' rights? Don't conservatives love that? A: Generally yes. These five justices have held that the federal government has no business telling a sovereign state university it can't steal trade secrets just because such stealing is prohibited by law. Nor does the federal government have any business telling a state that it should bar guns in schools. Nor can the federal government use the equal protection clause to force states to take measures to stop violence against women. Q: Is there an exception in this case? A: Yes, the Gore exception. States have no rights to have their own state elections when it can result in Gore being elected President. This decision is limited to only this situation. Q: C'mon. The Supremes didn't really say that. You're exaggerating. A: Nope. They held "Our consideration is limited to the present circumstances, or the problem of equal protection in election processes generally presents many complexities." Q: What complexities? A: They don't say. Q: I'll bet I know the reason. I heard Jim Baker say this. The votes can't be counted because the Florida Supreme Court "changed the rules of the election after it was held." Right? A. Dead wrong. The US Supreme Court made clear that the Florida Supreme Court did not change the rules of the election. But the US Supreme Court found the failure of the Florida Court to change the rules was wrong. Q: Huh? A: The Legislature declared that the only legal standard for counting vote is "clear intent of the voter." The Florida Court was condemned for not adopting a clearer standard. Q: I thought the Florida Court was not allowed to change the Legislature's law after the election. A: Right. Q: So what's the problem? A: They should have. The US Supreme Court said the Florida Supreme Court should have "adopt[ed] adequate statewide standards for determining what is a legal vote" Q: I thought only the Legislature could "adopt" new law. A: Right. Q: So if the Court had adopted new standards, I thought it would have been overturned. A: Right. You're catching on. Q: If the Court had adopted new standards, it would have been overturned for changing the rules. And if it didn't, it's overturned for not changing the rules. That means that no matter what the Florida Supreme Court did, legal votes could never be counted. A: Right. Next question. Q: Wait, wait. I thought the problem was "equal protection," that some counties counted votes differently from others. Isn't that a problem? A: It sure is. Across the nation, we vote in a hodgepodge of systems. Some, like the optical-scanners in largely Republican-leaning counties record 99.7% of the votes. Some, like the punchcard systems in largely Democratic-leaning counties record only 97% of the votes. So approximately 3% of Democratic votes are thrown in the trash can. Q: Aha! That's a severe equal-protection problem!!! A: No it's not. The Supreme Court wasn't worried about the 3% of Democratic ballots thrown in the trashcan in Florida. That "complexity" was not a problem. Q: Was it the butterfly ballots that violated Florida law and tricked more than 20,000 Democrats to vote for Buchanan or Gore and Buchanan. A: Nope. The Supreme Court has no problem believing that Buchanan got his highest, best support in a precinct consisting of a Jewish old age home with Holocaust survivors, who apparently have changed their mind about Hitler. Q: Yikes. So what was the serious equal protection problem? A: The problem was neither the butterfly ballot nor the 3% of Democrats (largely African-American) disenfranchised. The problem is that somewhat less than .005% of the ballots may have been determined under slightly different standards because judges sworn to uphold the law and doing their best to accomplish the legislative mandate of "clear intent of the voter" may have a slightly opinion about the voter's
Re: [MLL]The possibility of a new capitalist class emerging under socialism
Per Rasmussen wrote: From Che Guevara Discussion Area: http://www.voy.com/493/ Date Posted: 16:49:15 11/17/00 Fri Author: Spetsnaz Subject: A much better explaination of my point! Much better than my previous points In reply to: declan's message, "Re: Well I'm not perfect or 100%" on 16:49:15 11/17/00 Fri Hey Declan, I understand you entirely, on your points about war etc, but on the mistakes of Marx, Lenin? Where do you see this? Spetsnaz: Well Marx, Engels, and Lenin never saw the possibility of a new capitalist class emerging under socialism. Where did they say they would disappear under socialism to begin with? You are assuming that which is not in evidence. Could you provide some citations. Stalin himself declared that there were no more internal class enemies in the USSR, no capitalists no kulaks. Stalin proved wrong. Judging from his writings I would say he meant they were no longer a major threat by the mid 1930s, not that they were no longer in existence. It wasn't untill after Khruschev seized power and began dismantling socialism, only than did Mao Zedong say that the class struggle continues under socialism. But before Mao said that, the view was that the class struggle doesn't continue under socialism. That is ridiculous and clearly shows you did not do your homework. Many times I have strongly suggested that people read my book entitled THE RELEVANCE OF MARXISM found on my website at http://my.ohio.voyager.net/~klomckin. There can be little doubt you have failed to do so in this regard. Lenin repeatedly made comments like the following which will probably make you feel like you have been buried and they directly contradict your thesis. 440 (a) "Classes have remained, and will remain everywhere for years after the conquest of power by the proletariat." Source 25, page 34 (b) "We know perfectly well that classes have remained in our country and will remain for a long time to come (in the socialist phase--Ed.)" Source 20, Vol. 32, page 250 (c) (Add) "But in order to achieve this we must remember the fundamental postulate of the socialist revolution which the workers so often forget, and that is, that in order to make a socialist revolution, in order to bring it about, in order to liberate the people from oppression, it is not necessary immediately to abolish classes" Source 20, Vol. 27, pages 475-476 441 (a) "So long as there are classes, there is bound to be class struggle. This is an inexorable law." Source 14, Pamphlet 2, page 5 (b) "As long as classes exist, the class struggle is inevitable." Source 20, Vol. 42, page 376 (c) "Socialist society covers a considerably long historical period. In the historical period of socialism, there are still classes, class contradictions and class struggle, there is the struggle between the socialist road and the capitalist road, and there is the danger of capitalist restoration." Source 48, page 12 (d) "...there are classes and class struggle in all socialist countries without exception." Source 70, page 40 (e) "The transition from capitalism to a socialist (read: communist--Ed.) system entails a long and bitter struggle." Source 20, Vol. 26, page 438 (f) "...we have always said that we cannot pass from capitalism to the full victory of socialism (read: communism--Ed.) by the bloodless and easy path of persuasion and conciliation, that we can only reach our goal as the result of a furious struggle." Source 20, Vol. 27, page 233 (g) (Add) "They will understand that after capturing state power the proletariat does not thereby cease its class struggle, but continues it in a different form and by different means." Source 20, Vol. 30, page 269 (h) (Add) "The proletariat's conquest of political power does not put a stop to its class struggle against the bourgeoisie; on the contrary, it renders the struggle most widespread, intense, and ruthless." Source 20, Vol. 31, page 189 (i) (Add) "In a socialist country, it takes a very long historical period gradually to settle the question of who will win--socialism or capitalism ...'the conquest of power by the working class is only the beginning of the revolution, not its conclusion." Source 70, page 37 (j) (Add) "Theoretically, there can be no doubt that between capitalism and communism there lies a definite transition period (socialism--Ed.) This transition period cannot but be a period of struggle between moribund capitalism and nascent communism--or, in other words, between capitalism which has been defeated but not destroyed and communism which has been born but which is still very feeble." Source 22, page 4 (k) (Add) "In this respect, the question of which will win out, socialism or capitalism, is still
Re: [MLL]Fidel Castro to the Venezuelan Parliament
Bill I appreciate your posting the address by Fidel Castro before the parliament of Venezuela and have read it completely. Fidel is in good form as usual and makes a lot of correct assessments. The following comment is especially worthy of note and should be taken very seriously by Chávez. Being absolutely objective I should say that there is in Venezuela today only one man who can lead such a complex process, and that is Hugo Chávez. His death, either intentional or accidental, would terminate that possibility and bring about chaos. By the way, since I have come to this point and as I have come to know him somewhat, I must say that he does not contribute to his own security since he is reluctant to even a minimum of adequate measures. You can help him, and also his friends and his people, persuading him to be more cooperative. You should not have any doubts that his adversaries, both external and domestic, will try to have him physically removed. Chavez would be extremely well advised to take these comments of Fidel seriously. Fidel knows exactly what he is talking about. Fidel continues by saying, This I say because I have been through the peculiar experience of being the target of over six hundreds such attempts carried through to various degrees of completion. An Olympic record! I know that enemy only too well; I know how they think and act. This trip to Venezuela is no exception. I am aware that once again they have toyed with the idea of finding a possibility to carry to the end their so far thwarted designs. But, that is not important. Contrary to the present situation of the Venezuelan process, in Cuba there has always been and will forever be somebody, actually many, who can take up my work. Furthermore, I have lived many happy years of struggle and I have seen a good part of my dreams come true. I am not like Chávez, a young lively leader with great tasks still to undertake. He should take care of himself. I have honored my word. I have spoken with absolute honesty, avoiding excessive diplomacy or affectation. I have talked to you as a friend, as a brother, as a Cuban, as a Venezuelan. I am deeply appreciative for your generous attention. Ever onward to victory! If Chavez fails to take these admonitions to heart he could very well pay the ultimate penalty. A presidential candidate on the verge of victory in Columbia next door was assassinated not long ago. On the other hand, even though I rarely disagree with Fidel on anything there are exceptions and this speech provides some examples. He stated the following, I mean that this government could, in a few years, totally eradicate illiteracy and provide a first class education to all children, adolescents and youths and a high cultural level to most people; ensure excellent medical care to every person; create jobs for the youths; strike out embezzlement; reduce criminality to a minimum; and, provide decent housing to all Venezuelans. Not in a capitalist system, especially one in which Venezuela is not among the 10% of the capitalist nations that leech off the other 90%, draining them for all they can get. Thats a pipe dream. Fidel continues, A rational distribution of wealth, through an adequate taxation system, is possible in a market economy. Of course, that demands a total devotion to work by all members of the revolutionary forces. This is easily said but it can be an extremely hard and strenuous task. However, in my view, on a short term basis Venezuela would not have much choice. On the other hand, no less than 70% of the wealth here is state owned, as neoliberalism did not have enough time to give them all up to foreign capital, so there is no need for nationalization. A rational distribution of wealth, through an adequate taxation system, is possible in a market economy. I am going to give Fidel the benefit of the doubt and assume he is playing to nationalistic interests and urges to break loose, because I dont think even he believes that silliness. Taxation has never equitably distributed wealth in any capitalist nation in history. As the billionaire Leona Helmsly inadvertently stated on American television nationally, Only little people pay taxes. And boy did she get flack for that. The capitalists forced her to go on nationwide television and retract her remark by personally signing a check to the Internal Revenue Service. She revealed what they have spend hundreds of millions keeping secret. Fidel also stated, On the other hand, no less than 70% of the wealth here is state owned, as neoliberalism did not have enough time to give them all up to foreign capital, so there is no need for nationalization. No need for nationalization! Apparently this was meant to be a blow for the national bourgeois of Venezuela as they try to get out from under the control of foreign (Read American)
Re: [MLL]tkp(ml)
hkb wrote: - Original Message - From: "nac" [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.front-social.coù This does not go anywhere for me. Klo ___ The above link doesn't get me anywhere. James. ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
[MLL]Fidel's speech
Does anyone have a copy of Fidel's speech to the Venezuelan parliament? I'd be interested in reading what he had to say. Fraternally, Klo ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
Re: [MLL]Communique of CPC Central Committee Plenum
Bill Howard wrote: - Original Message - From: Bill Howard [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2000 2:38 AM Subject: Re: [MLL]Communique of CPC Central Committee Plenum While the Communist Party of China website is.. http://www.chinatoday.com/org/cpc/ come to think of it that looks like the China Today website erm, that is published in the West, I think the first part of my message is for Peoples Daily though which is CP China... Try sending to Peoples Daily... [EMAIL PROTECTED] or you can go to PD website - they do have a PD website search engine available for their archives... http://web3.peopledaily.com.cn/english/ Heres a few more CP email addys in case you need to get in touch... Communist Party of Argentina E-mail Address(es): [EMAIL PROTECTED] Communist Party of Australia E-mail Address(es): [EMAIL PROTECTED] Communist Party of Austria E-mail Address(es): [EMAIL PROTECTED] Communist Party of Belgium E-mail Address(es): [EMAIL PROTECTED] Communist Party of Bangladesh E-mail Address(es): [EMAIL PROTECTED] Communist Party of Bohemia-M... E-mail Address(es): [EMAIL PROTECTED] Communist Party of Brazil E-mail Address(es): [EMAIL PROTECTED] Communist Party of Britain E-mail Address(es): [EMAIL PROTECTED] Communist Party of China E-mail Address(es): [EMAIL PROTECTED] Communist Party of Columbia E-mail Address(es): [EMAIL PROTECTED] Communist Party of Cuba E-mail Address(es): [EMAIL PROTECTED] Communist Party of Cyprus E-mail Address(es): [EMAIL PROTECTED] Communist Party of Czechoslo... E-mail Address(es): [EMAIL PROTECTED] Communist Party of Denmark E-mail Address(es): [EMAIL PROTECTED] Communist Party of Ecuador E-mail Address(es): [EMAIL PROTECTED] Communist Party of France E-mail Address(es): [EMAIL PROTECTED] Communist Party of Germany E-mail Address(es): [EMAIL PROTECTED] Communist Party of Great Bri... E-mail Address(es): [EMAIL PROTECTED] Communist Party of Japan E-mail Address(es): [EMAIL PROTECTED] Communist Party of Kurdistan E-mail Address(es): [EMAIL PROTECTED] Communist Party of Luxembourgh E-mail Address(es): [EMAIL PROTECTED] Communist Party of Mexico E-mail Address(es): [EMAIL PROTECTED] Communist Party of Portugal E-mail Address(es): [EMAIL PROTECTED] Communist Party of Russian F... E-mail Address(es): [EMAIL PROTECTED] Communist Party of Slovakia E-mail Address(es): [EMAIL PROTECTED] Communist Party of South Afr... E-mail Address(es): [EMAIL PROTECTED] Communist Party of Spain E-mail Address(es): [EMAIL PROTECTED] Communist Party of Turkey E-mail Address(es): [EMAIL PROTECTED] Communist Party of Ukraine E-mail Address(es): [EMAIL PROTECTED] Communist Party of USA E-mail Address(es): [EMAIL PROTECTED] Communist Party of Valencia E-mail Address(es): [EMAIL PROTECTED] Communist Party of Vietnam E-mail Address(es): [EMAIL PROTECTED] Communist Party of Yugoslavia E-mail Address(es): [EMAIL PROTECTED] Bye for now Bill Bill Do you have any more addresses and which of these parties would you consider revisionist? Fraternally, Klo ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
Re: [MLL]Yugoslavia: The Institutions Are Still Paralyzed By Violence And Threats - Michel Collon
Bill Howard wrote: - Original Message - From: kloMcKinsey [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2000 11:07 PM Subject: Re: [MLL]Yugoslavia: The Institutions Are Still Paralyzed By Violence And Threats - Michel Collon The situations are not comparable. First, the Vietnamese received a tremendous amount of military and economic aid from its socialist allies. Who do you think is going to supply North Korea in this day and age? 10 years ago, Iraq did not have a friend in the world - in the last few weeks we have seen a trickle of aid being delivered, along with visits from Heads of State proclaiming their support. Are you saying that they will receive sufficient aid to restart a war with the US and its allies and win. I don't think so. Sadam Hussein is not in that kind of dreamland, at least not now. While US claims "breach of UN declarations" - I notice today that UK/US war planes continue their incursions into Iraqi air space as Iraq takes defensive measures. And your point is? By all accounts, Iraq should have become just another puppet regime by now - what will happen should this trickle of support turn into a flood and include not only food and medicine but also means of defense? And what will happen if the United States just decides to pack up and leave the Middle East voluntarily? One event is about as probable as the other. Second, North Korea is an established state with fixed targets, like Yugoslavia. Do you seriously think it could defeat its potential opponents militarily or not suffer tremendous losses. The present situation was only arrived at by tremendous losses suffered by the Korean People. Again, I fail to see the materiality of your reply. I am even having difficulty seeing its relevance. Third, the Vietnam war was essentially a guerrilla war with no fixed battle lines and that is more difficult for the capitalists armies to cope with. Apart from the 'North/South' border. Again I fail to note materiality. Fourth, the population of South Korea is not economically or ideologically in sympathy with socialism and for that reason guerillas swimming in a sympathic population would not be a viable possibility. This was fairly much the case in South Vietnam Are you serious? Precisely the opposite existed in Vietnam. The NLF was swimming in a sea of sympathetic supporters and allies. The US never knew for sure who was on its side and who wasn't. If the North Koreans could expect that kind of support in the South it would be a different ball-game. Fifth, Vietnam was in the process of instituting socialism, not considering the dismantling of it via social-democrats in positions of power. The North leadership regularly proclaims support for both "Socialism" and "Communism". What kind of answer is that Bill? How long have you been in this leftist business? That is precisely what Khrushchov, Gorbachov, Bukharin, and every other revisionist traitor proclaimed to the assembled throngs. How many revisionist parties in the world today have the words "communist" and "socialist" attached to their names? I don't care what people call themselves; it is deeds that count. Sixth, the geography and terrain of Korea are not nearly as conducive for a guerrilla war. The North has a programme reforestation of 50% of the country - which is already well under way. Good grief Bill! Are you claiming the North is planting enough trees to hide all its potential guerrilla forces. And just as importantly, I did not know they were planting them in the South. Whoever heard of guerrilla forces creating their own jungle canopy. Your answers often border on the bizarre. And seventh, North Korea would not have nearly as much support from world opinion as did Vietnam. There are other differences but you get the picture See point 1 above.. See all the points I made above for a real fix on the situation. For the cause, Klo Bill ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
Re: [MLL]Korean Unification
George G wrote: Dear Klo, I am sorry that I don't have time to go into this in detail, but I must say that you really misunderstand the national question here. Most Koreans, north and south, of all political views, favor re-unification, even if it on a "one country, two systems" basis. George. What on earth is a one country two-systems basis? I think the misunderstanding lies elsewhere. How do you have the means of Prod. Dist. and Exchange being owned by the working class and the bourgeois simultaneously? That's quite a trick. How do you have a government that is under the control of the proletariat and the bourgeoisie simultaneously? Please describe to me in detail how this "one country, two systems" basis is organized and operates. For the north to call for re-unification and the end to the occupation by US troops gains them a lot of prestige in the eyes of their compatriots in the south, and is quite correct. I have no problem with that as long as reunification is done on the basis of socialism prevailing throughout the peninsula. I am much more concerned with concrete acts than propaganda ploys while you are working in reverse. If you are claiming the North is calling for the reunification of the peninsula and the withdrawal of American troops as a propaganda tactic under the full realization that it is not going to occur so long as socialism may prevail, I can accept that as a possible approach. With regard to the comparison with Germany, first Stalin never wanted Germany divided, and second Germany was split up because it was occupied due to having been the aggressor in WWII. Korea is divided because of US occupation and the establishment of a neo-colonial regime in the south. So anyway the situation is quite different from Germany's. No it isn't. We are talking about what acts led to the swallowing up of East Germany and the possibility of an identical process taking place on the Korean peninsula, not how North Korea and East Germany came to be socialist in the first place. You are focusing on a quite secondary matter. The key question is one of making sure that North Korea does not go the way of East Germany and the historical process by which they came to be socialist to begin with is essentially immaterial in this regard. Fraternally, George ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
Re: [MLL]Korean Unification
redredred wrote: Comrades One thing, I believe that is not properly addressed in this Korean discussion is the immense power of the Chinese. I think that in many respects that the Chinese and the North Koreans have been under-estimated. I however, agree that the whole juche concept is , philosophically idealist. That is true because it essentially contends that ideas are primary and material conditions are secondary rather than vice versa. Man is part of nature and not separate from it. This misconception (mistake-error) on the part of the Koreans does not seem to affect their over-all anti-imperialist position. It already has apparently. They marched together under one flag in the Olympics didn't they. The symbolism of that is quite powerful. They have never stated that unification would be on any other grounds than theirs, and we should not ignore this fact. But have they said the reverse? Have they definitively stated that unification would take place on their grounds and their grounds alone. I don't think so. I think the overwhelming cultural links and desire for unification of the Korean people has not been entirely placed in perspective in this discussion either. The Germans had the same feeling and we can see what that led to. Also, I believe that to give the South Korean president the nobel peace prize is a sign of desperation from the imperialists in order to raise his prestige amongst the South Korean people. Nobel prizes are a propaganda tool of the innth degree. They are meant, among other things, to extol that which the capitalists favor and denigrate or demean that which they oppose. They are EXTREMELY political. Just look at who has received them, especially the prizes for literature and peace. The South Korean leader met with the North Korean leader allegedly in the cause of peace. Why didn't the latter receive an award as well? I will give you three guesses. But before you guess you might want to note his politics. The facts are that unification has been a strategy and tactic of the North Koreans for many years, not the South. What? This sounds like capitalist propaganda. So the North has had designs on the South for years but not vice versa. So the North is the potential aggressor and the poor south just wants to be left alone. What have you been listening to lately? You have been surreptitiously conned my friend. The wall between the two, in case you did not notice, was erected by the North out of fear of the South and the American occupation forces. It is the South that keeps conducting joint military exercises with the American forces, exercises that the North repeatedly strongly objects to. Mock invasions from the sea occur on a regular basis. Now to whom do you think that is directed? It is the South and Americans in particular that conducts the vast bulk of the espionage. It is the US and its stooges that keep telling the North what it can and cannot do in the realm of nuclear energy. The United States demands to be allowed to enter North Korea to inspect its nuclear sites. If I were the North I would reply: Sure, no problem as long as we can send our experts through Oak Ridge, Hanford, and other American nuclear facilities, view whatever strikes our fancy, and dismantle whatever we consider a threat. They (the South)have been forced by popular opinion. How they will handle the vexing question(in relation to this matter) of the state is yet to be seen but I am not yet wedded to the position that a purge of the North Korean leadership is absolutely necessary. I am, when they talk about reunification on a basis other than socialism. As of now I see no possibility whatever of reunification on any other basis than capitalism. I am totally, completely, and implacably opposed to the reunification of that peninsula. And that position will remain unaltered until I see a vast shift in the balance of economic, political, and military forces in that area. The big snake could never swallow the small frog if Marxist-Leninist principles held sway. Lenin and Stalin both cut deals with the capitalists but they never sold the store in the process. They always knew when a quantitative change would or could lead to a qualitative leap. Lenin made agreements with the capitalist industrialist, Armand Hammer, for example, but he never jettisoned basic concepts. And Stalin employed many American specialists on construction projects. The main designer of the Dniepestroy Dam, for instance, was an American. We will no doubt see whether or not this is the case With that I agree. For the cause, Klo Comradely James ___ Marxist-Leninist-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list
