On Sat, 25 Jan 2003 00:26:12 -0800 (PST) "Brian O. Sheppard"
<bsheppard at bari.iww.org> writes:
> On Fri, 24 Jan 2003, Yoshie Furuhashi wrote:
>
> > I rather doubt that ANSWER organizers, full-time or part-time, are
> > working toward "hardcore Leninist" ends. _The_ Leninist end is to
>
> Yoshie, did you read what I wrote? I said the WWP, who are behind
> ANSWER.
> Do you think they're not the core group behind ANWSER now or
> something?
Brian,
Please do us the favor of reading what Yoshie has written before responding to it. She never said that that the ANSWER organizers were not Leninists. What she wrote was:
"I rather doubt that ANSWER organizers, full-time or part-time, are working toward "hardcore Leninist" ends. _The_ Leninist end is to work toward socialism, but the sort of anti-war coalition building and mobilizing that IAC and ANSWER make possible comes with the price of never being able to put socialism even obliquely (not to mention squarely) on the agenda."
In other words she was saying that while these people may well consider themselves to be "hardcore" Leninists, their work in ANSWER seems to have little direct linkage to any attempt at placing socialism on the political agenda.
And she goes on to write:
"American socialists of various political dispositions have done a pretty good job helping build various social movements -- civil rights, anti-war, etc. -- but their good work has never really helped them to massively expand their own explicitly socialist organizations independent of Democrats and other liberals."
All this seems clear to me. What part don't you understand? In fact it is clear from Yoshie's words, that her point is applicable not just to "hardcore" Leninists like WWP but to socialist and I'd dare say anarchist groups in general. Despite the successes that these groups have had in the past in the creation of large and often successful social movements, none of them has ever really been successful in placing socialism on the American political agenda, nor have they have really been successful in expanding their own explicitly socialist organizations independent of the Democrats. Even the CPUSA which in the 1930s did enjoy a period of considerable political success and expansion when it was following a Popular Front strategy did so, basically, as an adjunct of the Democratic Party.
>
> Getting into a debate with you about Leninism - let alone the sort
> of
> Leninism advocated by the WWP wherein the Tiannenmen Square
> killings are justified, where it is argued that the WTO should be
> enlarged
> to include more countries (as they argue), and where a cult-like
> atmosphere pervades - is not on my agenda. With you, it'd be little
> more
> than a war of attrition, complete with your pages-long literary
> excerpts and neverending
> replies. Not interested.
All this shows is that your visceral reactions to Yoshie have impaired your reading comprehension skills since the points that she made in her post had little to do with WWP's position on Tiannenmen Square. Indeed, her points were not by any means specific to WWP but are applicable to most if not all socialist parties and sects in the US, including the anarchists.
Jim F.
>
> Brian
>
> --
>
> "At times one remains faithful to a cause only because its opponents
> do
> not cease to be insipid." - Friedrich Nietzsche
>
> "Il etait enfin venu, le jour ou je fus un pourceau!" - Comte de
> Lautreamont, Les Chants de Maldoror, 4th Hymn, Strophe 6
>
>
________________________________________________________________ Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today Only $9.95 per month! Visit www.juno.com