<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<title></title>
</head>
<body>
I think it was<br>
<br>
No body can organise a revolution. It happens. Any organised <br>
revolution is a contrived one and suffers from distortion. A party <br>
needs to be in place to take advantage of such situations. A comunist <br>
party cannot overcome fudalism to jump to Socialism. But A communist <br>
Party is better placed to achieve capitalism after thowing the feudal <br>
State as it can approach such a development in an orderly way <br>
compared to the market dictated unplanned chaotic development such as <br>
India is facing right now. So there is a need for a communist party <br>
in any stage of development provided that party does not confuse the <br>
prevailing stage and try to build socialism straight away. <br>
<br>
<span class="moz-txt-tag">-- <br>
</span>kalalepsarathy <br>
<br>
But now I see that he did answer it at the end.<br>
<br>
Joanna<br>
<br>
Carrol Cox wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid44C7CAA9.A21D77E8@ilstu.edu">
<pre wrap="">
joanna wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">So, are you saying that capitalism is the apex of social evolution? Or
that it was a necessary stage on the way to a to be hoped for socialism?
Joanna
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
Please don't assume that everyone has read a given post. Who are you
replying to? Give us a hint at least of what he/she said.
Carrol
___________________________________
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk">http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>