Boris Kagarlitsky's "Suicide of the New Left Review" was posted on this list and has been widely circulated. Here's a comment on it by NLR Editorial Committee member, Tariq Ali, which may be of interest. Tariq's book "Revolution From Above: Where Is the Soviet Union Going" (Hutchinson, London 1988) is jointly dedicated to Boris Kagarlitsky ... and Boris Yeltsin.
----------------------------------------------------------------------- THE THIRD PERIOD IN OUTER-SPACE: A BRIEF COMMENT ON BORIS KAGARLITSKY'S 'SUICIDE OF THE NEW LEFT REVIEW'
Tariq Ali
I was not completely surprised by BK's outburst regarding the modest re-launch of the New Left Review. I have known him for a very long time and he is often given to intemperate statements, but still remains a lovable and warm human being. I will never forget a ferocious argument in my kitchen when Boris was visiting London with his wife and son in the late 80's. His hostility to Gorbachev astounded me since the alternative, Yeltsin, had degenerated beyond belief. Boris felt that a Yeltsin interregnum would be welcome because after Yeltsin 'the left would come to power.' I told him at the time that this was a suicidal political approach and reminded him of the Stalinist 'third-period' during which social-democrats were denounced as the 'main enemy' and Thaelmann's demented statement marking the fascist triumph in 1933: 'After Hitler, our turn.' Boris was, of course, sure that he was right and I was wrong , but before the argument could proceed any further, we were interrupted. His son had soiled his trousers. I remember saying how apposite this non-verbal statement from a toddler was, indicating as it clearly did an instinctive hostility to his father's hallucinatory ultraleftism. Many years have passed since then and a mafiocracy rules Russia. The population is sullen, but cowed. Vladivostok is not Seattle. But Boris is unchanged. Now he talks of the suicide of the NLR. The old NLR was often, in his words, guilty of 'superficial radicalism' and 'toothless moderation', but it was internationalist and a meeting place for socialists worldwide. Now it has betrayed its past and is moving beyond the pale. When I met him recently at the Socialist Scholars Conference in New York he had very little to say about the NLR, but a great deal about his own personal complaints against the publishing house, Verso, which had rejected his book on the European Left. I had no knowledge of this rejection, but was pleased on his behalf when he told me that Pluto Press had published it in three small volumes and it was doing very well, but I could see he was very angry at being rejected by Verso and was particularly hostile to the letter he had received from Robin Blackburn rejecting the manuscript. But what could have been the 'suicide of Verso' for the crime of having rejected a manuscript from Boris has been casually transferred to the New Left Review. We have been discussing changing and re-launching the NLR for the last ten years. Everyone agreed it was necessary, but the energy necessary to push it through was lacking till last year, when Perry Anderson took a sabbatical from his job at UCLA to come and supervise the re-launch. This has now taken place and the response to the new design, lay-out, more space for book-reviews and culture has been generally welcomed. Anderson's signed editorial has, unsurprisingly, attracted some criticism but the basic point he stresses is, alas, undeniable unless one is temporarily squatting in outer-space. Capitalism's triumph at the end of the last century was sensational. The collapse of all systemic alternatives is plainly visible. Seattle was extremely invigorating, but neither that nor the strike-wave in France amounts to a fundamental change in the situation. To exaggerate will only increase the despair. To recognise what has happened does not mean a passive acceptance of the status quo. We will carry on the debate, naturally, as Jeffrey Isaac and Alex Callinicos demonstrate in NLR 2, but the fact is we live in a different epoch from the one which Lenin described as one of 'wars and revolutions'. The NLR remains, as it always was, hostile to the imperial adventures of the United States and its sidekicks in the European Union. Many of those who left the editorial board have made their peace with the new order. In 'Renewals', Perry Anderson made it very clear that our position was unchanged. We opposed the adventure in the Falklands, devoting an entire issue to a sharp critique of Thatcher and those in the Labour Party who supported her. We opposed the Gulf War equally severely and even Boris must recall our position on NATO's recent war in the Balkans or Putin's assault on Chechnya. And, don't despair, Boris. The NLR will continue to publish articles from contributors in every continent, but more time will be spent on making sure that they are carefully edited so that the new generations can understand them. We will try and eliminate what Marshall Berman has described as 'academic gobbledookism'. The NLR, as always, should be judged on the quality of its content. It's a pity there was no one close to Boris, soiling his or her diapers, to divert him from this foolish and subjective intervention. If you feel too lonely in outer-space, come back to us old friend.