From: Paul Zarembka (zarembka@BUFFALO.EDU)
Date: Sat Mar 26 2005 - 13:02:36 EST
Rakesh, you snipped off the paragraph I was referring to: "The traditional idea of revolution tells us contain our impatience, to subordinate our impatience to the patient construction of the party. But we do not want to fall into that, for it kills the movement by boredom. We too have two temporalities: the temporality of the impatient Ya basta!, revolution here and now! and the temporality of the patient construction of another world. But in the traditional concept impatience is subordinated to patience, and in our concept it should surely be the other way around: patience is there to give force to the impatience of refusal, not to subordinate it. The wisdom of experience is there not to restrain the rage of youth, but to give it strength." The RCP, for years, has called for releasing of rage, and it often focuses on the youth, just as in John's statement. I'd dare say the RPC can also present itself as a patience force to give strength to impatience. This is all I wanted to say, i.e. these parallels. Paul Z. ************************************************************************* Vol.21-Neoliberalism in Crisis, Accumulation, and Rosa Luxemburg's Legacy RESEARCH IN POLITICAL ECONOMY, Zarembka/Soederberg, eds, Elsevier Science ********************** http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/PZarembka On Fri, 25 Mar 2005, Rakesh Bhandari wrote: > > > >John Holloway's position here is identical to that to the > >Revolutionary Communist Party U.S.A., whether he would welcome that > >connection or not. > > > >Paul > > Do you think John H is advocating a taking of power, Bob Avakian style? > > Rakesh > > >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Mar 27 2005 - 00:00:03 EST