>>> Max Sawicky <sawicky at epinet.org> 09/29/99 03:28PM >>>
>>> Max Sawicky <sawicky at epinet.org> 09/27/99 04:12PM >>>
CB:
. . . There is no threat of war between the old European interimperialist
rivals, as was a very important aspect of Lenin's analysis and era. . . .
mbs: I think this is a key point, which incidentally can be turned up w/o benefit of Leninist analysis.
(((((((((
Charles: To ignore Lenin's originating the analysis is a sort of plagarism,
mbs: It's not plaigarism to stick your head out the window and notice the main capitalist countries are not at each others' throats.
((((((((((
Charles: Hang with me here, Max. While Lenin was alive and for a long time after his death the main capitalist countries were at each other's throats. So, what Lenin contributed was the observation that they were at each others' throat more than they were in the immediately previous period.
Now, today our observation that they are not at each others' throats anymore implicitly is a contrast with Lenin's observation.
The whole of issue of interimperialist rivalry or a change from it is a Leninist category. Bourgeois political economists don't talk about "interimperialist rivalry" or lack thereof.
((((((((((
Max:
I was not referring to the original analysis (Imp the Final Stage . . .) which I read 30 years ago, probably didn't understand then, and have long since forgotten.
Charles: Oh of course you have to give the mandatory , cookie cutter, joking insult against this text from the dogmatic, tyrannical, all around evil person , Lenin and his dumb ideas. It's part of the liberal ritual. I understand.
>>>>>>>>>
but of course, comrade Lenin didn't try to copyright his intellectual
property. The issue of failing to credit Lenin is an expression of
anti-communism, and , obviously, anti-Leninism. You might say "so what?" To
me it is important because it demonstrates the scientific validity of
Leninism , contra the bourgeois propaganda that Leninism is "ideology".
I believe the rest of Max's post is intended to agree with what I said, no ?
CB
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
((((((((((((((
Max:
Yes but you don't make it easy.
((((((((((
Charles: No progress without struggle , you know.
((((((((((((
Max: If anti-communist means not looking forward to the goal of a communist society, or disagreeing with communists of whatever type, then sure I'm an anti-communist. So what. So is everyone else who is not a communist.
Charles: Well, here your anti-communism is the mandatory ( should we say knee-jerk ?) dissing and distancing yourself from an updated Leninist understanding of today's configuration of the politics of the major imperialist countries, even when you agree with a Leninist and the Leninist agrees with you.
To return to one of your themes, I am pointing out that your comments on issues are guided as much by ideology (anti-communist ideology) as those like me who you acuse of being guided by ideology in some improper sense. You do recall criticizing my posts as if their objectivity was compromised by my ideology, don't you ? And then my reply was you are as much ideological as I am. This is a clear example of how your political and economic theory is ideological too.
CB
((((((((((
Max: If it means advocating the persecution of communists or attacks on communist countries (of which few seem to remain), then I would deny being A-C and take the accusation as a slander.
Nor am I on any crusade to debunk Lenin. It's not worth the time.
mbs