Functionalism in Marxism Again

[Chris Burford]

At 18:14 29/03/01 -0500, Yoshie wrote:

>  until capitalism is abolished, any reform the working class win will 
> inevitably have contradictory consequences, which are "functional" to 
> capitalism.


Indeed, how could it be otherwise? Marx's warm support of the victory of 
the 8 Hours Act was in the context of a clear analysis of the class forces 
that had allowed it to pass, as well as those that had fought for it.


>The first step toward a practical opposition to the Right in a war of 
>positions is to mobilize people who already are opposed to the Right but 
>have been politically inactive for a host of reasons.  Build your base, 
>and move forward from there, while in the process re-defining terms of 
>political struggles (including symbolic elements of them). That's the only 
>practical way to break the functional trap, in my view.


One of the reasons for inactivity may be the lack of a sufficiently clear 
analysis, which as Yoshie implies, will always have to be dialectical. It 
must distinguish which reform, at which time, has primarily a 
revolutionary, or primarily a reformist, aspect. They almost always have both.

Any would-be revolutionary who tells you otherwise is a mechanical 
idealist, not a dialectical materialist. That is why IMO the struggle for a 
progressive, and ultimately revolutionary, line of advance, has to involve 
drawing distinctions with left opportunist, as well as right opportunist, 
positions.

Chris Burford

London