Archive for the ‘mass line’ Category
Posted by Mike E on January 5, 2011
"There is no royal road to science, and only those who do not dread the fatiguing climb of its steep paths have a chance of gaining its luminous summits"
“I think (on the contrary) there is a quite large amount of ‘reflection on mass work done by Kasama members.’ If so don’t recognize it as such — do they perhaps have a different view of what mass work is, and what it looks like when communists discuss it?”
by Mike Ely
Ian Anderson opened an important door when he wrote:
“However, I share … frustration with the sparse reflection on mass work done by Kasama members. Seems like the project would be well-served by that sort of specific discussion. Is this a conscious methodological choice? Would like to tease that out.”
The issue to me involves an important controversy over the role of direct immediate personal experience. I welcome the chance to tease this out together, and would like to add a few words to what TNL has already written.
The Danger of Equating Direct Experience With Social Practice
Karl Marx writes:
“There is no royal road to science, and only those who do not dread the fatiguing climb of its steep paths have a chance of gaining its luminous summits.”
This is a philosophical controversy, that is deeply (very deeply) tied to long standing controversies over strategy.
The philosophical controversy is over whether communist theory must (and can) be both developed and tested within the immediate and direct experience of particular communist organizations.
Such assumptions are expressed in a very pointed (and very common) way by the Club Jacobin:
“…a serious political organization needs to stake out some claims and demonstrate their correctness through its practice.”
Is that true? That our claims (theoretical, philosophical, strategic) have their correctness demonstrated by our own practice? Just think of all the things that would mean!
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in >> analysis of news, >> communist politics, Marxist theory, mass line, Mike Ely | 7 Comments »
Posted by Mike E on January 2, 2011
Club Jacobin comparing Kasama to Jacobites?
The following is a critique of the Kasama Project written by “Gila Monster” on the blog, Club Jacobin. GM writes:
“It is a fairly negative piece, I’m afraid, but I hope that you’ll take it in the spirit of comradely engagement in which it was written.”
In that spirit of engagement, we are sharing Club Jacobin’s criticisms. We will shortly post a response from a supporter of the Kasama Project.
We hope this will give us all a chance to dig more deeply into the question it raises: what are the main strategic tasks presently facing revolutionaries and communists in the U.S.
The following piece contains some inaccuracies and misunderstandings; but we expect that such things can be addressed in the discussion.
* * * * * * * *
Maoist Jacobite Watch
by Club Jacobin
It’s been sad watching the Kasama website — sometimes one of the most interesting websites on the American Left — take a turn for the sectarian and away from serious politics in recent months. Sad, but not altogether surprising.
Kasama is originally the brainchild of Mike Ely, a longtime leader of the Revolutionary Communist Party, and one of the last relatively sane people left in that organization. (That is, until he left the RCP two or three years ago.)
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Barack Obama, Karl Marx, mass line, methodology, organizing | 18 Comments »
Posted by onehundredflowers on December 25, 2010
Tariq Ali is a well known political activist and novelist — whose background is within the Trotskyist movement of Britain.
Here is Tariq Ali’s review of Rebecca E. Karl’s book, “Mao Zedong and China in the Twentieth-Century World.”
Posting essays here on Kasama does not represent endorsement of the views presented. We share it here because it is of interest to our readers, and will encourage discussion on the lessons of the socialist revolution in the twentieth century.
To engage one of the key assumptions of this essay here in our introduction: Tariq Ali essay repeats an assertion common to many Trotskyist and “post-Trotskyist” analysis — that the way to understand the Chinese revolution, its politics and contradictions is to view it as a variant of Stalinism (and to act as if a 1930s Trotskyist critique of Stalinism is the prism through which one can understand Mao and Maoism over the next forty years).
For example Tariqi Ali writes:
“One of the tragedies of world communism was that most of the parties it spawned came of age and became mass organizations during the 1930s and 40s. By this time the early traditions of dissent and debate within the Bolshevik Party had been suppressed and most of their participants—including 90 per cent of those who served Lenin’s Central Committee—brutally exterminated. The model that new Communists imbibed was the one they encountered in Moscow: a social dictatorship of the Party/bureaucracy that was master of all public life and sustained by institutionalized networks of repression. This was the system put in place when they came to power or even within parties active in the capitalist and colonial worlds. The stifling of debate weakened both Party and state.”
Is this true? Is this sufficient? Is the party and state of the Chinese experience merely a reproduction of the Soviet “model” — or is this experience a struggle between several poles: Chinese feudalism, pro-western capitalist modernization, the Stalin model, and then a distinctive Maoist alternative to all three?
Then, at the same time Tariq Ali makes another point which confronts us all (whether we are sympathetic to Maoism or not):
“As Chinese capitalism proceeds further, creating even more social and economic disparities, perhaps some of Mao’s ideas might be deployed by the insurgent masses as they seek to storm the heavens once again.”
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in >> analysis of news, communism, CP Indonesia, Mao Zedong, Maoism, mass line, Tariq Ali | 22 Comments »
Posted by Mike E on December 15, 2010
Kasama received this commentary on Rosa’s recent letter.
“For me, transformation, openness to new ideologies may only come through something outside of the logic of communism and more about what inspires the heart, what shifts one’s perception.”
by Lenina
Thanks for sharing this story. I don’t know why but it reminds me of something one of my father’s students said to him in class.
The student said,
“Sir, why would we want socialism if no one can get rich?”
My father told him,
“Well for some to be rich someone else has to be poor, no?”
The student said,
“No, they just have to work hard and they can be rich too.”
My father said,
“So anyone can be rich then, but who is going to work for all the rich people, if everyone’s rich?”
The student was stumped.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in education, mass line | 5 Comments »
Posted by Mike E on November 13, 2010
by Mike Ely
You can’t suck it all out of your thumb. Out of your imaginings. Out of pre-invented principles. The people have a say. There are unexpected inventions and necessities. And the new orders are forged through a living process, in the heat of huge struggle and creativity… not from some pre-imagined schema and brainstorms.
In fact, there is an often-funny history of folks trying to invent and proclaim future forms for socialism.
The utopian socialists did it in the early 1800s. That’s why they were called utopians.
Lenin knew better (at first) — and his ultimate Soviet state was radically different than the parliamentary republic that most revolutionaries around him expected. The Soviets (workers councils) were themselves actually a new invention of the people-in-motion (and were, at first, opposed by early Russian communists when they started cropping up in 1905 — cuz the mass forms didn’t match their different preconceptions.)
When Lenin tried to “tap down” notions and by-then-immediate plans for state forms (in his summer 1917 State and Revolution) on the eve of his revolution — his written imaginings quickly proved very far from what he (himself) ended up leading only a year or so later.
The role of a communist party is not even discussed in State and Revolution‘s pages — but the fusion of party and state proved (in unanticipated practice!) to be a defining feature and innovation that came into being.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in >> analysis of news, labor history, Marxist theory, mass line, Mike Ely, Socialism | 34 Comments »
Posted by Mike E on September 29, 2010
Tweedledee and Tweedledum. Both communist abstentionists and figures like Nader argue that the two main parties are virtually identical "corporate parties." This has a great deal of truth, but also collides with the increasing ideological polarization of bourgeois politics.
“Those communists who believe electoral abstention is a simple principle have assumed that the mere participation of Nepal’s Maoists in national elections in the summer of 2006 was proof they had taken some terrible turn onto the “peaceful road.” It was (and remains) a line that can’t even start to calculate the options and openings created for revolution and legitimization by the Maoist victory in those elections.”
The following post was excerpted from yesterday’s essay Rough Notes: On Revolutionary Participation in Elections, to make the whole a little less rough.
by Mike Ely
Electoral abstentionism has never been a revolutionary communist principle. Or to put is more clearly, non-participation in elections is a strategic question, but not a simple strategic principle. That is not a surprise to many communists around the world — but it is often comes as a surprise to some communists in the U.S. (and also India) because of particular developments and traditions within the Maoist movements of those countries.
Revolutionary communists have historically held that electoral options need to be explored in their particularity (even if, in the U.S., the answer may come back repeatedly that revolutionaries should expose “both sides” from outside the electoral arena).
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in >> analysis of news, Barack Obama, Bob Avakian, election, Maoism, Marxist theory, mass line, Mike Ely, New Com. Movement | 15 Comments »
Posted by Mike E on September 2, 2010
This is an excerpt from a longer comment.
“A three tier model: Iskra project, Pravda project, Faultlines projects.”
by Mike Ely
My own view is (to put it very very crudely) that we need a three tier model — that distinguishes three very different levels of projects — in order to accomplish the work we face:
1) We need an Iskra project — i.e. a process by which communists and revolutionaries engage and clarify their levels of unity and their forms of organization. It would both be a space where this work gets done — and a pole within a much larger terrain serving as an attractive force for those most radical. It is dangerous to make the sausage right in the middle of the restaurant, but i think that’s the kind of public transparency and access that is needed (especially given the particular contradictions of our regroupment process).
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in >> analysis of news, communism, mass line, Mike Ely | 32 Comments »
Posted by Mike E on August 31, 2010
Peasant farmers in the Andes
by Mike Ely
In a neighboring thread, Spencer raised an important set of issues when he writes:
“Also, it so happens that Banaji’s contribution to the so-called “Mode of Production” debate in the 1970s is a powerful rebuttal of any kind of qualified, vague, or otherwise half-hearted feudal or semi-feudal thesis. The key essay is “Capitalist Domination and the Small Peasantry: The Deccan Districts in the Late Nineteenth Century,” which is reprinted in his new book Theory as History. In the interview, you would do well to notice, Banaji ties the semi-feudal thesis to the Naxalites’ opportunism. Ultimately, the Stalinist line of socialism in one country lies behind the claim of semi-feudalism.”
In a followup comment, written with a bit of (uh) opaque language, Spencer elaborates on his views and indicates an article by Banajii we could explore.
I am not prepared (yet) to dig directly into the specific arguments Spenser makes. I have not, yet, read Banajii’s contribution to the Indian controversies of the 1970s.
Flagging a Major Controversy Among Communists Worldwide
But I would like to flag (for our readers generally) that this question of semi-feudalism (historically, theoretically, and in the politics of today) is a major matter — and is tied to many political and strategic controversies (that emerge on front lines of revolutionary struggle where Banajii’s particular, pessimistic Trotskyism is not particularly influential.)
To put it in a nutshell: Mao led a revolution in a country deeply marked by feudalism — where capitalism was concentrated in a few cities and mining areas, and where most people only were connected to the world capitalist market by the arrival of commodities in the knapsacks of a few ruined artisan/peddlers. And the communists of the 1930s connected the profound suffering and rebelliousness of Chinese peasants with the world socialist revolution through the strategy of New Democratic revolution and peoples war.
And there is a deep strategic debate now of how applicable that particular road is:,
- how much semifeudalism still defines rural life in the post-colonial countries, and
- how to adapt earlier strategies in countries that are now often majority urban with huge capitalist manufacturing.
- Are rural agricultural laborers to be seen as peasants, or landless peasants, or rural proletarians. Or more precisely how do we define these categories, and how many rural people fall into each one, and what are their class and political differences)? (This issue recently came up here on Kasama in a discussion of rural uprisings in Puerto Rico, and whether the canecutters there were peasants or rural workers, whether their struggle was potentially for agrarian revolution or something else.)
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Maoism, Marxist theory, mass line, Mike Ely, Naxalite, peoples war, revolution, Socialism, Trotskyism | 25 Comments »
Posted by Mike E on August 28, 2010
“Even when the people have nothing, they do have themselves, i.e. the potential gravediggers of this society and the potential makers of history.”
By Mike Ely
In our discussion of confronting the rabid anti-mosque hysteria, SKS raised a number of important questions (that might get obscured by hype and hysteria of our own):
“Are we ready for shit? I don’t think so. We can declare all we want, but in this civil war, the other side has all the guns, all the training, all the discipline, and all the will. We have, some websites, dozens of sects, and a few individuals here and there with an odd shotgun or pistol.
“We will get our asses handed to us. This article is not ultra-left, actually in the abstract it is the correct line, but its suicidal in our current conditions. Without a people’s army, the people have nothing. And we have nothing.
I think your approach is a bit one-sided. And rather deeply pessimistic.
A materialist observation about our current weakness
First, let me start where we all agree with you: anyone with a brain who can count will agree with you that some mechanical, frontal assault on this system (or even on its core of fascist supporters) would not be tactically wise.
All we have to do is mention the Greensboro Massacre — here was a lesson that the communist movement in the U.S. paid for in real blood that should be studied. The communists in North Carolina threw out militant and understandable words about “Death to the Klan” and called for a rally, but were simply not tactically prepared when the Klan (with layers of secret government support) came to kill them.
So yes, you are right. Though it is a bit absolute the way you say: “the other side has all the guns, all the training, all the discipline, and all the will.”
They don’t have all the discipline or all the will — but certainly the lineup is incredibly uneven and lopsided.
Taking Initiative Under Adverse Balance of Forces
But it is quite possible, within a strategically adverse situation to creatively inflict major political setbacks on our enemies. And that is in fact (a) how we grow, and (b) in part, how we will move from the strategic defensive to a more favorable allignment of forces.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Mao Zedong, mass line, Mike Ely | 17 Comments »
Posted by Mike E on August 28, 2010
In 1966, millions of youth stormed the heavens during China’s Cultural Revolution
When Bill Clinton went to China he lectured the Chinese people about “human rights and democracy.” But the U.S. has propped up and sponsored death squads and brutal dictators all over the world and the CIA has been involved in fixed elections. Clinton criticized Chinese leaders for “rounding up dissidents.” But in the U.S., political prisoners like Mumia Abu-Jamal are locked up for their beliefs and Black, Latino and other poor youth are being systematically criminalized, brutalized by the police and imprisoned.
Clinton wants the Chinese people to believe that the capitalist free market will bring them “freedom and democracy.” But this is a lie. For the masses of Chinese people, imperialist penetration and the free market has meant more inequality, a growing gap between the rich and poor, and deepening economic instability.
It is socialism–not capitalism–that brings the masses real liberation.
When the great revolutionary leader Mao Tsetung died in 1976, counter- revolutionaries seized power and brought capitalism back to China. But for over 25 years China was a socialist country.
Under the leadership of Mao, the masses of people participated in the revolutionary struggle to transform society–to do away with classes, all inequalities and oppression. And during the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution in the 1960s, millions of students, workers, and peasants were mobilized to expose and kick out high-level authorities and party leaders who were trying to take China down the capitalist road.
Mao pointed out that even with new socialist relations there were leftovers from bourgeois society and the basis for inequalities. He pointed out that the basic divisions continue to exist in socialist society: between mental and manual labor, between town and country, and between workers and peasants. He said that a new bourgeoisie continually arises under socialism– concentrated at the highest levels of the party–and that class struggle continues under socialism, all the way to the elimination of all classes and the establishment of communism on a world scale.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in China, communism, Cultural Revolution, Mao Zedong, Maoism, mass line, revolution | 3 Comments »
Posted by Mike E on July 11, 2010
The following is part of Kasama’s beginning discussion of how to study and what to study — for the reconception of communist theory, for the training of new communist activists, and for the broad preparation of communist revolution.
The following is a rather comprehensive study guide of the inherited communist cannon — and appeared on Josh Syke’s blog The Marxist-Leninist. It was developed according to the political and ideological line of Freedom Road Socialist Organization (ML), and approaches study with an orthodoxy of assumption and content hearkening back to methods promoted during the Stalin-era Comintern (1927-1952). This is in a rather stark contrast to the other approaches advocated in Kasama’s previous threads on communist theory.
Study Guide
This topical study guide is intended for all of those interested in learning about the theory and practice of Marxism-Leninism, the science of revolution.
Marxism-Leninism is the synthesis and summation of the historic experiences of the revolutionary struggles of working and oppressed people against capitalism and imperialism for more than 160 years, and as such it is a weapon to be used by working and oppressed people in their struggles for emancipation, liberation, and the building of a new world. As Stalin has said, Marxism-Leninism is not a dogma but a guide to action.
The focus of the study guide is on the classic works of the five principal theoreticians of Marxism-Leninism: Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin, and Mao. Also included are the writings of many other revolutionaries who have creatively applied M-L to the concrete conditions of their countries.
The readings have been divided into distinct topics, with the idea that this study guide will mostly be used by individuals for study on their own in tackling particular, concrete problems. Each topic is then subdivided between basic/essential readings and supplementary readings. The selection here has been made mainly in the interest of finding texts can be grasped quickly and in a practical way.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Marxist theory, mass line, methodology, study guides | 20 Comments »
Posted by Mike E on June 29, 2010
Zengakuren 1967
“Revolutionary politics and militant tactics are inherently shocking to powerful sections of society. It is certainly unacceptable to that liberal establishment (that some want to ally with). It is offensive and infuriating to the more backward. And any serious revolutionary movement needs to travel (with enthusiasm) straight into those hostile winds — with a deep strategic sense that there are other forces who in class society who are not nearly so conservative.”
* * * * * * *
This discussion is about general politics and overall evaluations — it does not advocate any specific acts, in any specific timeframe.
by Mike Ely
An anarchist wrote in a neighboring thread:
“i find it a little odd the way Marxists in the US always associate militant action with anarchists almost exclusively.”
That is a misunderstanding. I think you are talking to the wrong Marxists. The experience of the Maoist movement in the U.S. (to take just one example) is closely tied with many forms of militancy — starting with the Black Panther policies of armed self defense, and then also with the militant combativity of Students for a Democratic Society (SDS). And denoucing militancy is (in my view) associated with very particular currents within the Left — whose strategic errors are closely tied up with those tactical views..
Learning and Practicing Street-Fighting in 1968
While in high school, those of us attracted to SDS took classes at a local “Free University” in radical theory and the street fighting snake dances of the Japanese Zengakuren.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Black Panthers, China, Mao Zedong, Maoism, mass line, Mike Ely, New Com. Movement, revolution, vanguard party | 41 Comments »
Posted by Mike E on June 25, 2010
In Nepal, the Young Communist League is playing a special role in training professional revolutionary cadre for the creation of a new socialist state
“There are ways in which a “revolutionary people” rises to the occasion, and makes up for the lack of trained cadre — by rapidly “stepping into the shoes,” by innovating, by unleashing its own great creative initiative. That is part of the communist mass line. And it is not like we should envision our communist movement as a mega-thinktank of revolution, preparing future generals and ambassadors in some academic way. Yes, we mainly “rely on the people” to solve the great problem of leading and administering all of society. and many many people will step forward to take up tasks they would NEVER dream they would do.
“But there is also, alongside that (alongside our PRINCIPAL mass line strategy for solving these problems) also a real need for highly trained and sophisticated political cadre — for statesmen, planners and organizers of a highly trained kind.”
“This is why I have always been wary of arguments that lightly condemn the communist ‘party-state.’ If we are not going to try to seize and wield the OLD state, and if we are not going to generate waves of new cadre within sophisticated party and army formations, where exactly will the many hundreds of thousands of cadre come from to create and lead the new state and the new order?”
By Mike Ely
Miles Ahead wrote:
“I’m all in favor of the need for a division of labor! but do think that perhaps division of labor gets muddled and misconstrued in practice with the concept of professional revolutionaries—even with the leadership and cadre in a revolutionary/communist organization…
“Within the concept of being a professional revolutionist, further divisions held sway in the hierarchy of the “professionally trained” revolutionary organization I had devoted my life to. The chasm widened and deepened between the theorists and the “practical” workers, leadership and led, under the guise of being professional revolutionaries.
“Without getting into some very crass (and ultimately demoralizing) examples, this experience did make me wonder—was there something inherent in Lenin’s call in the first place that would lead to this kind of practice, or was Lenin correct for his time and in general, but that his call left the door open for future revolutionaries’ misinterpretation, bastardization of the concept, or even an opening for political abuse?”
Part of the question of professional revolutionary is this:
An organization that aims at fighting for reforms needs to be able to organize a mass campaign. And the kind of cadre it trains and develops have to be able to organize a mass campaign (i.e. agitate, organize, fundraise etc.)
But a revolutionary movement aims to replace the existing state, develop an army, organize a planned economy. Its tasks at the moment (writing, organizing, fundraising, dealing with state repression, etc.) are only a distant precursor of the tasks it plans to undertake.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in >> analysis of news, >> communist politics, Communist Party, Maoism, mass line, Mike Ely, vanguard party | 7 Comments »
Posted by Mike E on June 23, 2010
To Kasama Project:
I’ve been reading this list for more than a year and find the commentary and analysis to be great reading. I like how the list branches out into areas of popular culture, history, science, etc.
However, I was wondering if it might be possible for Kasama to develop a reading list (from a Marxist/Maoist perspective) of important works on political economy, philosophy, Russian Revolution, imperialism, etc.
The reading list could allow for readers to engage in independent study, discussion, etc. I’m not sure if kasama has some reading lists developed, but I thought I’d throw it out there.
Comradely,
Doug
Posted in >> Kasama Project, Marxist theory, mass line, study guides | 57 Comments »
Posted by Mike E on June 8, 2010
Alabama volunteers preparing booms
We have received the following from Scott, who has made a personal crusade out of tirelessly promoted and documenting his own view of the Maoist idea of mass line.
How the Mass Line is NOT being used to help Deal with the Oil Spill
by J. Scott
The article below from the New York Times talks about how a local community in coastal Alabama used their own initiative and came up with a good plan to protect their area from the horrendous BP oil spill down there, and then themselves put that plan into action with good effect.
A conservative friend of mine, who sent me this article, contrasted the admirable initiative of the people there to the story of a couple stuck on a stalled escalator: “Help, we are stuck here, won’t anyone help????” There is indeed something about contemporary liberal bourgeois society that promotes mass “helplessness” and inaction!
Of course, the oil mess in the Gulf is not a trivial matter like being “stuck” on an escalator! And there certainly does need to be considerable governmental coordination and supervision of the overall efforts to stop the leak and clean up the mess (as best as can be done).
But the most interesting thing in this case is that both BP and the government have opposed this local initiative and the independent ideas and work on the part of the people of Magnolia Springs, Alabama. Instead of welcoming such ideas and initiative and promoting it, they have apparently even threatened those who did it with punishment!
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in >> analysis of news, mass line | 7 Comments »
Posted by Tell No Lies on May 27, 2010
What makes communist leadership communist?
from FRSO/OCSL
Being a leader means someone that can lead and be led, that can teach as well as learn, and that can speak for others as well as listen. Leaders are chosen (and set aside or replaced) by the people themselves.
The Mass Line: What It Is
and How to Use It
by Patrick Ryan
“The Communists fight for the attainment of the immediate aims, for the enforcement of the momentary interests of the working class; but in the movement of the present, they also represent and take care of the future of that movement.” – The Communist Manifesto
While organizing people on the bus, I met a Black janitor who was very supportive of our work to fight for better buses and lowered fares, but thought that “immigrants” caused the bus fares to cost more. Instead of agreeing with him, I pointed out the salaries of the administration of the transit agency, and how they had given themselves raises all while cutting bus routes and upping fares and that disproportionately affected immigrant people. Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Maoism, mass line, Patrick Ryan | 22 Comments »
Posted by Mike E on May 24, 2010
Thanks to Jeff Weinberger we have been debating ANSWER’s call for demonstrations for a punitive government nationalization — “Seize BP.”
“In the collision between “corporate power” and the “imperial state” — I feel it would be of no benefit to us to appear to be partisans of the imperial state… Seeming to be eager for government takeovers is one of the ways that defacto support for Obama sneaks its way into the politics of those who (in words) claim not to support this government.“
“The supreme court recently ruled that for purposes of political donations corporations should be considered the equivalent of an “individual” and their contributions should be considered the equivalent of an “individual’s” constitutional right to free speech. Well if corporations are individuals, why can’t we demand that they are executed for capital crimes?
“Why can’t we demand that BP (and Halliburton, or Blackwater) be (metaphorically) brought down to the public square and executed for its crimes against humanity — its officers jailed, its possessions dispersed and sold off, its records made public, its existence simply ended.”
by Mike Ely
How do communists and revolutionaries approach the formulation of demands for broad coalitions and mass movements — demands and struggles that by their nature have potential support far far beyond the ranks of the consciously revolutionary?
How do we play a constructive role — helping to bring people together in struggle, creating conditions for raising political consciusness, and helping more and more people get a sense of the nature of this system, and the implications of rather different political strategies?
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in >> analysis of news, ecology, mass line, Mike Ely, Socialism, Trotskyism | 4 Comments »
Posted by Mike E on May 10, 2010
Leon Trotsky (left), Joseph Stalin (right)
By Bill Martin
Interesting, I suppose, that we quickly get away from discussing what Lenin wrote and instead into Stalin/Trotsky and the like.
Here, at least along one line of analysis, is the connection. Lenin led a revolution. In this “Unexplored Mountain” essay, Lenin is stressing the need for visionary leadership, which entails not falling back on conventional thinking, especially when the process that is unfolding is entirely new and unprecedented.
Trotsky also played a role in leading the Bolshevik Revolution, and it is shameful that this role has been erased from the standard histories of the Revolution promulgated by Stalinists and Maoists. Even the erstwhile Maoists who have recently discovered truth stumble over this point (they choke, really), and we (who want to continue the revolutionary legacy of Maoism and develop it qualitatively) should draw some lessons from this.
My own view, for what it is worth, is that Trotsky’s Marxist theorizing, while interesting and creative, does not help us understand or make a revolution against imperialism; the legacy of Trotskyism is, in the main, to deny key elements of Lenin’s understanding of imperialism, and to return us to “classical Marxism.” Furthermore, for all kinds of reasons, Trotsky was never going to be the leader of the CPSU. However, none of this means that we shouldn’t study Trotsky’s theory of permanent revolution and other work [some of which is just as "Stalinist" as anything Stalin wrote], or that we should not recognize the very important role that Trotsky played in the Bolshevik Revolution.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Bill Martin, Communist Party, Mao Zedong, mass line, Soviet history, Stalin and Stalinism, Trotskyism | 75 Comments »
Posted by Mike E on May 5, 2010
Eldridge Cleaver proclaimed:
“This is a stickup motherfucker! We’re coming for what’s ours.”
Che said:
“At the risk of seeming ridiculous, let me say that the true revolutionary is guided by a great feeling of love.”
How do we portray revolution and its motives? How do our images and tone reflect morality and goals?
Is the revolution a furnace of anger and payback? An act for a greater humanity, or as a long suppressed grab for “us and ours”?
Are we about identity or universality? Or both? And how do we convey that?
Is our hand extended or clenched? Or both? Is there an ecology of revolution with multiple streams, audiences, and modalities? And how do we convey that?
If stereotypical communist imagery is exhausted, what potent new symbolism do we now adopt (or invent)?
Is our banner “Serve the People” or “Up Against the Wall, Motherfucker”? Both? And in what mix? With what impact?
Who are we seeking to attract? Who are we willing to repel? What is the spirit we want to invoke and spread? What are impulses can marshaled to push on through to victory?
These issues are played out in many ways. In whether we have humor or not, in whether we can take criticism (even from enemies), in how we react when living revolutions portray themselves as patient and welcoming.
The following is part of an essay by the Black novelist Richard Wright, on the messages and difficulties of communist self-image. It was first published in the Atlantic Monthly, Vol. 174, No 2 August 1944. (Thanks to Land who transcribed this for posting.)
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in >> communist politics, art, comintern, mass line | 14 Comments »
Posted by Mike E on May 4, 2010
Fire on the Mountain has called on gray heads to remember the days when Ohio National Guardsmen shot dead four of us on Kent State campus. I’m grateful for the initiative.
Here is my small piece of a much larger picture.
By Mike Ely (Kasama Project)
May 1970. Forty years have passed. It is history now in the eyes of the world. But for me, and many others, it is raw and alive. It always will be.
I won’t tell the well known details – if you don’t know them, look them up. But I will tell you what it felt like, and looked like to a teenage boy who wanted desperately to see the liberation of the Vietnamese and Black people in America.
May Day for Bobby Seale — New Haven 1970
On May First 1970, I was in New Haven, Connecticut. Bobby Seale, the chairman of the Black Panther Party was facing a murder trial in New Haven. They had first bound and gagged him in the courtroom of the Chicago 8, then shipped him to Connecticut to lock him up for life. We were determined to free him.
Students came from all over the East coast to turn the city upside down. On my campus, we had worked day and night to explain the attack on the Black Panther Party – and to mobilize busloads to go New Haven.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in >> analysis of news, anti-racist action, antiwar, Black Panthers, communism, Mao Zedong, Maoism, mass line, Mike Ely, New Com. Movement, revolution, Vietnam | 5 Comments »
