I think a point I've argued with Charles before may be relevant here. It seems to me that Charles believes that a political gain is made by demonstrating that Marxism is a true theory. Though I happen to think that on the whole it is true, the urge to prove it seems to me in contradiction with Che's excellent remark that it wasn't his fault that reality was marxist. Let me repeat some dogmatic propositions I laid down a month or so ago in a post to pen-l.
Most of the people who build an alternative to the dp will be Democrats. Most of the leaders even in that process will continue to support Democrats. Most of the people who make a revolution will not be revolutionaries. Most of the revolutionary leaders even will not be conscious revolutionaries. Most of the consciously revolutionary leaders will not be marxists.
Thus the task of marxists (who are despite or rather because of the propositions an essential element in any mass movement) is not to devote themselves to proving that marxism is a true theory but rather to devote themselves to expanding our knowledge of reality through the incorporation of marxist theory into their own thought and practice. More on this some other day.
Carrol
^^^^^^ CB: I really think Carrol makes us consider the right issues when he lays down these dogmatic propositions on the nature of the practical movement. Even if I don't agree with every single one, it is the correct topic area, or at least a very important area. I'm glad he sticks with it. I'm going to ponder the above dogma.
Anyway, maybe I am trying to prove Marxism as true, but when I think about it I'm being more bold than that: I am assuming or asserting that Marxism is true, but in the Marxist sense, which is to say that Marxism ( Engels and Lenin) holds for relative truth , not absolute truth ( though in a dialectic of relative and absolute truth). Maybe Sartre gets it when he says Marxism is the philosophy of our times ( not all times). In our lifetimes, Marxism is sort of like New York: when you leave it , you ain't goin' nowhere. I'm not trying to prove it is true. I'm presuming it's true. It's not absolute and total truth ( Marxism doesn't explain everything). But it is a huge chunk of social truth today, and will be until capitalism is long gone. There are areas of social science and practice to be developed beyond the classical concerns of Marxism. But all or most of them complement, don't negate, Marxism. Race liberation, national liberation, women's liberation, personal liberation, gay liberation, environmental cleaning have to integrate with workers' liberation to be successful.