I agree with Steven that the main transformation should start from the periphery and the constituency of the party we need should be the "super-exploited workers" (i hesitate to use "World Party"). there is already a potential in the periphery to start the transformation. this potential does not strongly exist in the core. as the majority of discussions in this thread suggest, core is stuck with gradual transformation, liberal internationalism and short-term results. in my view, this does not help because it is ALREADY happening historically. capitalism has been quite successful in incorporating the anti-systemic forces in the core. left is already institutionalized and depoliticized since the 80s. the fact that we are discussing this issue in the internet already shows that there is no genuine mechanism outside the internet where can talk about politics (sad). if anti-systemic means "against the system and capitalism", we should discuss what sort of party we need and plan of action we need to undertake accordingly. thanks for your attention.
Mine
>wwagar@binghamton.edu wrote:
>Dear Steve,-->Yes, I agree that liberal and pacifist reformism is pretty >weak
>tea when measured against the array of systemic forces now >contending for
>global hegemony. Such reformism is commendable to the >extent that it
>promotes humane values, but it is no substitute for social, >economic,
>political, and cultural action by antisystemic world parties. My >only
>caveat is that we should get beyond the 19th-Century Marxian >definition of
>"worker." Obviously some workers are more exploited than >others, but the
>success of global capital in co-opting hundreds of millions of >workers and
>outfitting them with a false bourgeois consciousness must also >be taken
>into account. We need to promote a sense of solidarity and >common
>interest among all those who work for a living and are, >whether to a
>greater or lesser extent, exploited. The rhetoric of the PLP >may be
>suitable in super-exploited peripheral and semiperipheral >countries, but
>turns off a lot of progressive folks in the core (and perhaps >elsewhere),
>whom we also need in the struggle to forge a socialist and >democratic
>world civilization. Nevertheless, the PLP comes a lot closer to >my
>conception of a World Party than a coalition of reformists who >believe in
>working "within the system." The system is a system: its job is >to
>survive and prosper. Ours is to replace it. Can we do our job >by
>political action alone? Of course not. The World Party needs >an
>ideology, a philosophy, and a rational faith, which I have tried >to
>imagine in my novel. But it also needs, when the time is right, >to
>strike.> Warren
>On Sat, 13 Nov 1999, Steve Rosenthal wrote:
> I'm a newcomer to WSN. I'm chair elect of the ASA Marxist section
> and active on PSN. I've been reading Wallerstein's "The End of the
> World as We Know It." I don't agree with some of it, but Wallerstein
> continues to address significant questions with new insights and
> perspectives.
>
> I expected the world party discussion to be more rooted in the
> sociological and historical insights of world systems theory and
> Marxism and the experiences of previous internationalist political
> organizations. Instead, with a few notable exceptions, most of the
> discussion has been rooted in reformism and liberalism.
>
> Here are a few of my thoughts. I'm sure some will disagree with
> them.
>
> In this period of crisis and decline of the capitalist world system,
> a "world party" is certainly needed. We face sharpening
> interimperialist rivalry, intensified by a crisis of overproduction
> that has plunged most of Asia, Russia, and Brazil into a depression.
> Nationalist/fascist forces dominate some major countries and are
> gaining strength in others. Wars reflecting nationalist and
> inter-imperialist rivalries have been occurring in the Persian Gulf,
> the Caspian, central Africa, West Africa, and the Balkans during the
> past decade. These wars, with their genocide and ethnic cleansing,
> are harbingers of a third world war--an imperialist war to redivide
> the world. Wallerstein sees the U.S. as the declining imperialist
> power, and European and Asian imperialists as the main contenders for
> the position of new hegemon. That might be correct. Right or wrong,
> the workers of the world will be slaughtered until they organize to
> end imperialism. Under these circumstances, a reformist or pacifist
> strategy is suicidal.
>
> The goal of an international party of the working class must be to
> wipe out capitalism and make the working class the rulers of the
> world. It's immediate struggles must focus on opposition to
> imperialist wars, to the symptoms of growing fascism, to racism and
> nationalism. It's main constituency must be workers, especially the
> super-exploited workers: black, immigrant, and women workers in the
> U.S., immigrant workers in all core countries, and the masses of
> urban and rural workers in the semi-periphery and periphery. It's
> constituency should also include young people, students, and the
> working class youth who are drawn into the military to fight for
> capitalist interests. They must be won to transform these wars into
> "civil wars" against capitalism.
>
> An example of an organization that is attempting to organize an
> international party along these lines is the Progressive Labor Party,
> which was formed in the early 1960s. They are actively involved in
> the UNAM strike in Mexico City, in workers' struggles in Central
> America, the Caribbean, and South America, and among workers and
> students in the U.S. They reject all forms of nationalism and are
> trying to build one international party, not separate national
> parties in each country. Their website is at www.plp.org
>
> Steve Rosenthal
>
>
Mine Aysen Doyran
PhD Student
Department of Political Science
SUNY at Albany
Nelson A. Rockefeller College
135 Western Ave.; Milne 102
Albany, NY 12222