From owner-marxism-international Thu Apr 17 09:30:47 1997
From owner-marxism-thaxis
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 09:00:06, -0500
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 15:19:16 -0400 (EDT)
From: LKED54B@prodigy.com (MS DEB P KELSH)
From: “Amrohini J. Sahay” <ajsahay@mailbox.syr.edu>
Subject: M-I: PANIC LEFTIST: FRAME TEN
Subject: M-TH: PANIC LEFTIST: FRAME TEN
Red Theory Collective (SUNY-Albany)
in solidarity with
Revolutionary Marxist Collective (SUNY-Buffalo)
*********************************
PANIC LEFTIST: FRAME TEN
Christi-Ann... believes that the rigorous debate in the
revolutionary left simply strengthens the capitalists who see
divisions etc. as “weakness." Discussions and rigorous
critiques, however, are part of serious engagement with issues:
they are not signs of sectarianism but commitment to social
change. Critique (not anecdotes and abuse and substitution of
scatological epithets for political and theoretical analysis) is
the condition of possibility of vanguard politics. (Stalinism is,
above all, the silencing of critique that thus provides the
conditions of its internal implosion: the
de-politicization/de-mobilization
of the vanguard.) By relentless critique the vanguard left marks
the space of its practices and places them in the public space for
democratic interrogation and inquiries. However, if Christi-Ann is
correct and the contesting debate among the revolutionary left
“weakens” it, imagine what damage the
trade-union compromising with the capitalists does to
revolutionary practices. If capitalism, according to Christi-Ann,
takes heart from seeing divisions among the revolutionary left,
then capitalism must be doubly heartened by the dissents and
debates among the workers (e. g., conflicts on contracts,
strikes... ). We think it is counter-revolutionary to
suppress open critique simply to provide the
“illusion” of unity:
LEFT IS NOT ABOUT CONSENSUS. CONSENSUS IS A BOURGEOIS WAY OF
MANUFACTURING A “CENTER." LEFT UNITY IS ACHIEVED BY ITS
“RUTHLESS CRITIQUE OF EVERYTHING EXISTING." Critique is part
of class struggle. The language of critique must be complex
enough, layered enough to be able to analyze the highly
sophisticated, nuanced and elaborate constructs of ruling class
practices and ideas. To demand that critique be
“translated” into a commonsensical language is to
systematically reduce its analytical ability: to turn it into a
“moral” sermon (Uncle Lou), abuse and scatological
shouting (Hugh Rodwell), or simply ranting (Malecki). Critique
must remain theoretically thick and deploy a language resourceful
enough to engage the most advanced discourses and practices of the
bourgeoisie. It is only on the net-left that the left is reduced
to such a simplistic level as the annotations of events: with such
a linear understanding of the world, the left not only is not able
to offer a counter-practice, it is the laughing stock of all
thoughtful people. No one — outside net-left—will take
Uncle Lou's comments as anything but vacuous stories, entertaining
but irrelevant...
CRITIQUE...
for a RED-NET... for INTERNATIONAL COMMUNISM!
Ms. Deb P. Kelsh
from list
marxism-thaxis@lists.village.virginia.edu