(OPE-L) Re: Paresh Chattopadhyay 'Capital, The Progenitor of Socialism'

From: gerald_a_levy (gerald_a_levy@MSN.COM)
Date: Wed Dec 24 2003 - 09:43:29 EST

Hi Paul (B).

 > BUT in
> asking  Mike the question at the end you seem to be forgetting 1
> point.  France in 1871 was an Imperial Power , and the workers were
> fighting against that power during an inter-imperialist war.

 I didn't forget that point.  Have you forgotten that in the quote
below that Marx wrote that smashing the  "bureaucratic-military
machinery"  is the "prerequisite for every people's revolution on
the continent"?  Surely, not every nation in Europe in 1871 was
an imperialist power, nor was every nation in Europe caught up in
the inter-imperialist war.

 > Venezuela is subject to the predations of imperialism and class
> conscious  workers have to formulate a different political programme. By
> preventing wholesale privatisation of the oil industry for a start,  we
> see a fundamental difference  brought about by the poor by 'ballot and
> bullet' .  The wretched article, as Mike correctly says,  from the NYT
> sent by Rakesh aims to cover up this distinction, one which workers in
> Argentina would not miss after the privatisations there of the 90's.

You make some good points.

Yes, the experience in Argentina is relevant.  What about the
experience in Chile in 1973?

In solidarity, Jerry

>   Now a question:  in reading again the 4/12/71 letter to Kugelmann, I
> noticed  the following:
>   "If you look at the last chapter of my _Eighteenth Braumaire_, you
> will find that I say that the next attempt of the French revolution
> will be no longer, as before, to transfer the bureaucratic-military
> machinery from one hand to another, but to _smash_ it, and THIS IS THE
> (capitalization added for emphasis, JL).
>   -- Do you think that this is also a prerequisite for the people's
> revolution in  Venezuela?

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Dec 29 2003 - 00:00:01 EST