I wrote:
>> The belief that marxism is THE alternative to capitalism is probably one
>> of the strongest factors keeping capitalism in power.
1/06/98, Andrew Wayne Austin respondd:
>Socialism is the alternative to capitalism
But what kind of socialism? Is private property allowed? Are there
political parties? Are there private businesses? I don't see that
"socialism" tells us much more than "marxism", or "democracy" for that
matter. What are the specifics? The devil is in the details.
>Marxianism, if you will) is the the most powerful theoretical and
>practical system for understanding and explaining our present situation,
>imperative to making global revolutionary change.
That's _your_ opinion; would you disallow differing views from discussion?
And what exactly is it that this "practical system" tells us that is
useful?
>The change comes in
>practice, by people on the ground, organized in a flexible global
>counterhegemonic movement.
We're in agreement here, and one doesn't need Marx to know this much; but
do you claim that all the "people on the ground" need to carry a marxist
banner before they can succeed?
>It is absurd to suggest that Marxism is what keeps capitalists in power.
>And it is ironic! Since it is the left anticommunism that Richard Moore
>shares that has actually played an historical role in keeping from the
>world proletariat the science of their class.
I don't consider myself an "anticommumist": that's much too vague. I don't
like Stalinism; I do like Castro. And sorry I hit a sore spot with you, my
point is just that if you tell the world's people that the only alternative
to capitalism is marxism, you won't get anywhere mobilizing "people on the
ground".
rkm