>>> Louis Proyect <lnp3 at panix.com> 11/23 1:04 PM >>>
Charles Brown:
>Louis misrepresents the debate between
>us when he claims I have not gone
>into it in historical depth. What he means
>is he disagrees with me, but it is not
>true that I have not responded to him
>with historical depth equalling his. I have
>quoted people other than Lenin (though
>there is no lack of historical depth in that).
>For example, I have referenced Herbert
>Aptheker , a prolific professional historian,
>who is a Marxist. Aptheker's historical
>depth is equal to but really greater than
>Louis Pro.'s So , he is off on that characterization.
>I also cited Hobsbawn to Louis at the suggestion of
>another professional historian and Marxist,
>Professor Mark Solomon ( not on the list)
>who sharply disagreed
>with Louis' analysis of the French Revolution.,
>which I sent to Solomon.
Charles, the problem is that both Aptheker and Hobsbawm have been connected with Communist Parties their entire adult life. _________
Charles: Actually,this is a strength not a problem as with Lenin too. Independent Marxists don't have a record of better Marxism than Party related Marxists.
___________
The CP analysis has enshrined the notion of a "revolutionary" bourgeoisie. ________
Charles: Marx and Engels said in The Manifiesto of the Communist Party that the bourgeoisie have played a quite revolutionary role in history, or words to that effect. So, if we are discussing a Marxist perspective, in the sense of the perspective Marx and Engels had, then , the CP analysis you describe is quite Marxist. ________
The reason for this is political. The CP's, since the Popular Front turn, have built alliances with the "progressive" wing of the bourgeoisie. In the most extreme version of this, Earl Browder characterized FDR as a revolutionary and dissolved the CP. _________ Charles: The references by Lenin, Marx, Engels, Aptheker and Hobsbawn to the revolutionary bourgeoisie in the 1700's are not the basis for Browder's postions in the 1900's and the CP line of socialism as 20th Century Americanism in
the sense that the CP did not consider the U.S. bourgeoisie revolutionary in the 1900's.
On Browder's dissolution of the CP, you forgot to mention that he, the General Secretary of the Party, was expelled for the attempt and the CP was not dissolved.
This is also interesting for those who try to portray the Gen.Sec. as always a dictator with no internal debate in the CP.
___________
That being said, neither has the Trotskyist movement thought through this question to the degree it deserves. For my money, the sharpest debunking of the myth of a revolutionary bourgeoisie can be found in Daniel Guerin's history of the French Revolution. Guerin started out as a Trotskyist but switched to anarchism.
I have a ton of shit that I am trying to research right now, so I don't have the time to delve into the American revolution. But when I carve out the time, I am going to do a systematic study of the literature, from Aptheker to Beard to Theodore Draper's fairly new book, which is skeptical of the notion that a social revolution took place.
The one thing you won't catch me doing is quoting Lenin. ____________
Charles: The one thing you won't find me doing is falling for the line that quoting Lenin is a sign of uncritical thinking. Leniin dead is a more critical thinker than most of the people I know alive.
Charles Brown
"Without revolutionary theory , there can be no revolutionary movement " --- V.I. Lenin