But you have to put it in context: written in the 1930's, by a leninist-communist. It said what had to be said.
Apr 29 2006 18:11
Apr 29 2006 18:56
OliverTwister wrote:
But you have to put it in context: written in the 1930's, by a leninist-communist. It said what had to be said.
Nope, anti leninist from the early days, not one of those shite left communists who were still fucking about in the Workers Opposition or the 3rd international.[/i]
Apr 29 2006 19:07
Yeah but anti-Lenin in a fucked-up way - I.E. since there were so few proletarians in Russia they were doomed to failure. What kind of communist position is that? Sounds like the flip side of nationalism.
Apr 29 2006 19:12
OliverTwister wrote:
Yeah but anti-Lenin in a fucked-up way - I.E. since there were so few proletarians in Russia they were doomed to failure. What kind of communist position is that? Sounds like the flip side of nationalism.
hmmm to be honest i think it's hard to judge whether it was always doomed to failure in Russia, but I do know that the Bolsheviks were certainly an obstacle to success.
As much as i detest economic determinism I'm a bit baffled by your "flip side of nationalism" question.
Apr 29 2006 19:18
If one's line is that communist revolution is only possible in countries which have large urban proletarian populations, does that make one a communist in europe and a 'national liberationist' in asia?
Apr 29 2006 19:55
OliverTwister wrote:
If one's line is that communist revolution is only possible in countries which have large urban proletarian populations, does that make one a communist in europe and a 'national liberationist' in asia?
a) who said anything about "urban"? there are proles in the countryside.
b) where does feudal relations remain the dominant form of production?
Apr 29 2006 19:59
revol68 wrote:
OliverTwister wrote:
If one's line is that communist revolution is only possible in countries which have large urban proletarian populations, does that make one a communist in europe and a 'national liberationist' in asia?a) who said anything about "urban"? there are proles in the countryside.
b) where does feudal relations remain the dominant form of production?
Before you ask questions which will make you look impatient, please note that I was referring to Otto Ruhle's conception of the proletariat and the possibilities for revolution outside Europe, not my own.
Thank you and have a great day.
Can comment on articles and discussions
Jack just hates the title