[OPE-L] Zusammenbruchtheorie and reformism

From: Gerald_A_Levy@MSN.COM
Date: Mon Dec 06 2004 - 08:50:51 EST

>  I always thought that this way you could explain the
> possibility of reformism in some periods (at the use value
> dimension), while stressing the inevitability of class antagonism at
> the value dimension.
> You are however right in this, that I am strongly against any
> Zusammenbruchtheorie, catastrophe theory. So I very much like
> Grossmann, Mattick Sr., Luxemburg, etc, but I have never bought this
> point.


Catastrophe theory could be used as a rationalization _for_ reformism.
I.e. if there is some sort of automatic mechanism that inevitably drives
capitalism towards economic catastrophe and social-political crisis
from which it is incapable of overcoming (even though there are
counter-tendencies that can delay for a long historical period this
result),  then -- so long as the catastrophe isn't immanent -- *why
not become a reformist*?

If, however, the future of capitalism is uncertain (i.e. mechanisms
that assert inevitability do not exist) and whether there will or
will not be an anti-capitalist revolution depends on the self-
organization and activity of the working class, then this
constitutes a strong argument for revolutionary organization
and activism.

In any event, reformism is not primarily a 'theory-driven'
political movement.  Rather,  reformist theories are primarily
_ex post_ rationalizations for reformism and opportunism.

In solidarity, Jerry

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Dec 08 2004 - 00:00:01 EST