War and revolution

[joanna bujes]

At 07:54 AM 05/23/2002 -0400, you wrote:
>Yoshie: "Revolution must have seemed a distant hope at the beginning of the
>First World War, and then look what happened.  A protracted large-scale war
>of the kind that appears to be in the works, with ground troops and all,
>has a potential to destabilize many regimes, unlike a brief cruise-missile
>strike from afar.  It's a danger, but also an opportunity, for anyone who
>seeks to bring about radical social change, be it for the left or the right."
>
>Tahir: This sentiment may look merely despicable to ordinary human beings, 
>which it is, but it is more important to realise that this epitomises the 
>'strategy and tactics' mentality, which is Lenin's great legacy to us all. 
>But the claims made above are utterly false. There were millions upon 
>millions killed in the first world war, in the Russian civil war, and 
>under Stalin. Yet we are to believe that all this led to "radical social 
>change" and that it was therefore kind of worthwhile in some way. Rubbish. 
>It led to nothing of the sort. Radical change if it means anything of the 
>kind would be an irreversible change in human consciousness and in human 
>custom, not simply the imposition of a new regime. The transition from 
>feudalism to capitalism and to bourgeois democracy was a radical social 
>change. The Russian revolution was nothing of the sort. Leninism is based 
>on the crudest sort of metaphor, of the kind 'revolution is war' and 
>therefore it must be carried out as war, wit!
>h !
>!
>its generals, its master strategists and tacticians and its chain of 
>command. Casualties are OK in large numbers as long as the enemy's 
>terrirtories are seized and his government replaced by one's own, etc. The 
>word "opportunity" in the above quote says it all. Comrades, if you don't 
>want us to tell you that you're talking shit, THEN DON'T FUCKING TALK 
>SHIT, OK? Go Kelley girl, I'm wit' you.

Sorry Tahir, but I don't see how what Yoshie said translates into what you 
said.

First, I completely agree with you that "radical change means ...an 
irreversible change in human consciousness and in human custom."  Some of 
that did happen in the former Soviet Union. For example, poll after poll 
shows that most of the Russian people find neo-liberal principles 
completely opposed to their own belief in a more ethical system of 
sharing...both the surplus and the risks.

As for wars leading to revolutions: this is not some Leninist principle or 
tactic; it's an outcome of people's real perceptions that war is not in 
their interest and that there are actually two ways of winning a war: the 
traditional way--go die for the ruling class, or the revolutionary way: 
overthrow the ruling class and unite, if possible, with the grunts on the 
other side.

When people march in demonstrations carrying signs that say things like "I 
won't die for Exxon" -- what do you think they're talking about?

Overall, I don't see what can be gained by throwing Yoshie, Charles, 
Carrol, et al. in a Stalinist camp and then claiming that they therefore 
have nothing to say.

Joanna