Comments on The Pensive Quill: Close to the Marx

Thanks for that Mick. I beleive I said Counterfire...

2011-09-19T08:25:12.699+01:00

Thanks for that Mick.
I beleive I said Counterfire was a remoulding of SWP, wether it be by expelled SWP members or whoever...same politics different name.I never said counterfire was a front, I said the anti-war march was a co-option move.You seem to have misread my post, the holocaust denial claims came from Shahid Rafique Malik Labour Party politician, I quote referring to the MCB decision not to play a part in the 2007 Holocaust Memorial Day, "Its flawed moral leadership places the MCB alongside the likes of the BNP leader, Nick Griffin, as nonattendees."I am sure you are well aquanted with Counterfire founder member Clare Solomon's antisemitic comments..."I think you’ll also find that ALL religions have had their oppressors-some worse than others true, but to paint the picture that Jews have been persecuted all throughout history is one that has been fabricated in the last 100 or so years to justify the persecution of Palestinians."
Please back up your accusation of Islamophobia against me with some evidence.

Stefan Before you make a blanket condemnation of ...

2011-09-18T11:44:43.139+01:00

Stefan

Before you make a blanket condemnation of the UK left it might help if you get some of the facts correct. Counterfire was started by people who were expelled, or left the SWP, it is not one of their many fronts. LP MP's may have many faults, amongst them supporting a war mongering former leader who danced to the USAs neo conservative tunes, but I am yet to come across a single Holocaust denier amongst their ilk.

In a broad based anti war movement, it would be a bit odd if not a crime, if the left refused to march alongside those from differing political persuasions
and religions.

As to Hamas, whilst its politics are not mine, it is a perfectly respectable organization and one I might add which received the popular mandate in the last democratic elections to take place in occupied Palestine.

You seem to wrongfully accuse others of being holocaust deniers whilst you yourself display a certain amount of islamophobia. Which is a shame as 'distributivism' seems a worthy subject to debate.

Modern day Marxists are constantly trying their ha...

2011-09-18T08:11:37.980+01:00

Modern day Marxists are constantly trying their hardest to reinvent and repackidge their ideology for the modern consumer.Over the past few years in Britain we've seen the rise of the Peoples Charter, the Labour Representation Commitee and the latest brainchild of the Left - the Coalition of Resistance, all drawing in the same old faces and no new blood.Over on the Ultra-left the Trots are doing equally well in remoulding the SWP into Counterfire but alas shooting themselves in the foot with a co-option move by calling an antiwar march in London in partnership with failed and reinvented radical Muslim groups whoose senior members stand accused of aiding and abetting Hamas along with Holocaust denial claims from Labour MP's.
Whilst "we don’t need to be economic theorists to sense the precariousness of our predicament," I ask the question should we be looking at a third-way economic philosophy such as Distributivism?

Mick, I know the Socialism in one country came wi...

2011-09-12T13:52:49.189+01:00

Mick,

I know the Socialism in one country came with Stalin but I feel Lenin would have ultimately embraced it had the prospects of the revolution not being spread looked likely. Lenin's was an ideological position but linked to strategy. Stalin's was less an ideological position and one of raison d'etrat. He asserted the position of the Soviet Union in a world probably looked at through the eyes of a member of the realist school. Consequently, he imposed Soviet foreign policy on the other communists in different countries.

Not for me to defend Lenin as I am NOT a Leninist ...

2011-09-12T13:43:50.821+01:00

Not for me to defend Lenin as I am NOT a Leninist as you know, but to be fair to Lenin, when he was still in control of his faculties, Europe was still ripe with revolution and not for a minute did he, or many old Bolsheviks at the time, believe their regime could survive in the long run without a revolution in Germany or another of Europe's major states. Stalin on the other hand with his Socialism in one country was beginning to think otherwise.

You mention the disastrous impact of Stalin's military purges and again here if Trotsky had moved against Stalin with the support of commanders like Frunze,Tukhachevsky, etc, they may never have occurred. Unlike Ataturk in Turkey, trotsky being a Marxist, believed socialism or any progressive change could only come about when led by progressive social forces, thus he felt even if he had gained power in a Bonapartist coup, no good would come of it.

Interesting times, I completely agree the USSR victory in WW2 was in spite of Stalin's leadership, not because of it. As a commander he was barbaric and wasteful with the way he managed his forces.

Mick, I take your point about the difference betw...

2011-09-12T11:49:42.743+01:00

Mick,

I take your point about the difference between Stalin and Lenin but to my mind it was a matter of degree rather than kind. A serious problem with Stalin was the suppression of politics, the placing of the secret police rather than the party in the engine of driving the movement (we can hardly say forward). Even WW2 was hampered by the purges and the removal of the most brilliant generals in 1937. And while Stalin gets much praise for defeating the Germans and saving the globe from fascism, the fact remains that his directives in the 1930s split working class alliances in Germany and allowed the Nazis to come to power when they could have been checked. On military matters Georgi Shukov won the war. He had the balls to stand up to Stalin and take control when Stalin was paralysed by indecisiveness. Had it not been for Shukov and a small band of people determined to remain in Moscow come what may while they built defences in depth to draw the sting out of the Wehrmacht on the road to Moscow, the capital would have fallen. Stalin was ready to desert.

My difficulty is that I am not convinced that Lenin would be that much different. Lenin abandoned far too much for me to think he would have had any qualms about abandoning the party. He knew when he suppressed democracy that the revolution would fail. He predicted it yet carried on all the same. Throughout, his greatest criticism was that Stalin was a bit rude, a trait he excused in Communists. Trotsky was hopeless. He either did not turn up for meetings where he could have turned things around or when he did allowed the Stalinists to get the upper hand.

AM Your right about the direct link between Stal...

2011-09-12T11:29:01.277+01:00

AM

Your right about the direct link between Stalinism and Leninism, with a vanguard party of professional revolutionaries to the fore, which Rosa Luxemburg astutely observed would end up in top down control of the movement and the society it controled. And so it proved, and eventually enabled Stalin to take control of the international communist movement and reduced it to little more than an adjutant of Soviet foreign policy.

Having said that, Stalin used violence to ensure his own rule and that of the Party and State bureaucracy, (same thing) something which Lenin would have never stooped to. Indeed just before his final illness,
he recognised his responsibility and attempted to move Stalin from the post of Party secretary, indeed in his last will and testament he forewarned about the road Stalin might take if he were not removed from that post.

Inexplicably, Trotsky and others agreed to cover this part of Lenin's will up, even though they had the support of powerful forces within the soviet military.

Stalin turned out to be the better politician and tactician and with a rising social class at his back. He understood perfectly in some situations the pen is not mighty than the sword.

Alfie, just back from Cambridge where I never saw...

2011-09-11T23:05:08.655+01:00

Alfie,

just back from Cambridge where I never saw too many Marxists!!

I think it would be foolish to hold Marx up as a saviour. But he did provide a great critique. A serious problem for Marxismm was Leninism out of which Stalinism had its roots. I don't buy into the notion that Stalinism was a complete departure form Leninism.

British chancellor of the exchequer George Osborne...

2011-09-10T16:14:05.497+01:00

British chancellor of the exchequer George Osborne speaking in November 2010 commenting on the funding given to dublin government "Indeed we export more to Ireland than to Brazil, Russia India and China put together" added in same speech "our two banking sectors are interconnected"

Mick Hall to me its not about walking or running its about putting the boot in good and proper in an historic and once in a lifetime opportunity

example: those of us who have espoused left and Republican struggle all our lives step up to the plate and stop paying mortages personal loans ,buying certain items etc

Cousin of mine who works in a certain public service in Britain described it to me as " they are at the equivalent of looking under the chairs for loose change just to keep the state viable on a day to day basis, the system cannot absorb even minor shocks now" same woman is apolitical just stated it as fact in her opinion.

At least 130 billion on the line

Great piece, as the old beards used to say back in...

2011-09-10T11:37:18.353+01:00

Great piece, as the old beards used to say back in the 1930s, in the future we have only one of two choices, socialism or barbarism. In many ways the implosion of Stalinism is to our advantage, as it proves a top down authoritarian version of 'socialist stalinism,' is not a viable vehicle, as it leads to a bureaucratic authoritarian State, something which most socialists now accept.

The real question for the left is to begin to have confidence we can do better than the neo liberal economic bunch, who have truly displayed the unacceptable face of capitalism.

However we must not run before we can walk, a Party of Indignation seems a fine start to me. We need to vigorously oppose those who claim state interference in the economy is a bad thing, after all when the balloon went up, Capital soon started sucking on the State's tit.

We need to act cautiously with a left social democratic programe which will offer us a way to regain public support, this is not as hard as it might seem to some, as ordinary folk are crying out for a more civilised way of life in the West and a slice of the economic loaf in the third world.

We should not be afraid to draw from the past, when public amenities were state run. Can anyone in the UK honestly say our public services, rail, water, power, etc, were any better after privatisation? Yet Irish and UK governments still profess this and continue to go down this road.

To put it bluntly "Luta Continua."

Larry, that in no way justifies what they done and...

2011-09-10T10:56:40.412+01:00

Larry,
that in no way justifies what they done and continue to do on the world stage today.
And as Simon points out, it was an deal which cushioned them.

The UK is lending the Republic money at 5.9% when ...

2011-09-09T20:39:34.789+01:00

The UK is lending the Republic money at 5.9% when Britain's borrowing rate is 2.5%.

They benefit from the prevention of a dramatic fall in trade with the Republic which would have otherwise occurred.

The UK's actions in lending the money prevented them being more vulnerable regarding the Irish downturn. They didn't do it for the Republic's benefit per se.

Failing that, they can deduct it from the millions...

2011-09-09T20:10:22.814+01:00

Failing that, they can deduct it from the millions they stole of the Irish in over taxation for decades.

who's been stealing it recently?

WHO is who?

david, are you for real? What has our economic wo...

2011-09-09T16:11:49.942+01:00

david,
are you for real? What has our economic woes got to do with 'dissisdent' republicans?
120 billion, I'm sure they will make that up during their quest to restructure just about every economy they have managed to get their grubby hands on.
Failing that, they can deduct it from the millions they stole of the Irish in over taxation for decades.

The big problem is that technology is wiping out j...

2011-09-09T10:49:17.896+01:00

The big problem is that technology is wiping out jobs.Supermarkets are now culling staff, where will new work come from ? Can't compete with China.

Rarley in history has Britain as a state been so v...

2011-09-09T10:01:32.281+01:00

Rarley in history has Britain as a state been so vunerable to what happens in Ireland

120 billion euro is outstanding to British banks in the 26 county state

Lets just through out there as a scenario- serious social unrest led by Republican elements leading to the economy being even more holed beneath the water.

Would a large write off of 120 billion leave the British state in trouble? Just wondering like

Anthony, Obviously capitalism has failed and will...

2011-09-09T03:24:47.153+01:00

Anthony,

Obviously capitalism has failed and will fail again. But we need a credible alternative. I am not convinced that pure socialism is such an alternative. From the little I have read of economics, it would appear that some sort of market is needed, though not a totally free one. From what I do know about Marx, however, I would seriously doubt that he is the Jesus Christ of the new post-capitalist world.

25 years ago, I took the last course on historical...

2011-09-09T00:47:34.481+01:00

25 years ago, I took the last course on historical materialism at University of Montreal, we were told back then that Marx was death, then we were told that history was also over. The Irony of it is that the people who sang the death of Marx and History have, by their actions, resuscitated Marx and accelerated the course of history.