>>> "Mr P.A. Van Heusden" <pvanheus at hgmp.mrc.ac.uk> 10/18/99 06:09AM >>>
On Sat, 16 Oct 1999, Charles Brown wrote:
After WWII
> and the fascists, I am sure he would agree that there must be an
> exception to the general right of freedom of speech for fascistic
> racists, just like the Marxists in the socialist countries thought in
> applying Marx's dictatorship of the proletariat to that concrete
> historical situation.
Damn. I wish I had a copy of Gramsci to quote out of.
I would fully support denying freedom of speech and action to fascists - just like I would support denying such freedoms to anyone who aims to silence workers.
I would, however, not trust the capitalist state to do it for me. Most of the time that the state 'does something for me' I find that I've been done in in the process. I'd support the tactic Antonio Gramsci argued for against the original fascists in the 1920s - mass action to deny fascists freedom of action.
Same with racism everywhere, I'd argue. The capitalist state is not the answer.
(((((((((((((((
Charles: I agree with you that trusting the capitalist state is problematic. Yet, this discussion comes under the whole problem of reform/revolution. Any reforms are , by definition, efforts to establish laws still within the capitalist state. Any demand, such as a shorter work week, or trade union rights or civil rights laws or whatever are subject to the same critique you make above. I do not subscribe to the notion of revolution or nothing, all or nothing. I don't recall Gramsci advocating not trying to win any reforms of the capitalist state. Nor Marx as an ultra-leftist. There are anti-fascist laws in France, Canada, Germany and I think England which have not been turned on the Left.
There is no contradiction between advocating reforms and supporting mass action to deny fascists freedom of action.
I agree our aim should be to persuade the working class to be in continous political motion, not trusting the state with whatever reforms it has already won. For example, the U.S. labor law reforms of the 1930's have been substantially eroded , because the collaborationist trade union philosophy has paralyzed the workers, and in effect they trusted the capitalist state to maintain them.
My proposal for outlawing fascistic racist speech is envisioned in the context of a mass workers movement rapidly moving toward taking state power. It would just be one element in a whole program guiding this movement and action, giving it some concrete goals and benchmarks for the process. I guess no revolutionary should think of any reforms as long term. They should all be conceived of as preliminary steps to revolutionary change.
CB