Re: [OPE] Important review of Kautskyism Past and Present

From: <>
Date: Thu Aug 12 2010 - 06:01:06 EDT


There has to be some way of acknowledging the superior contributions of
Marx and Lenin, for example, in explaining the real world, otherwise what
are you really saying. If you disagree with their arguments then we require
a substantial argument against them not liberal protestations about their
tone of argument etc. I am sure you agree. Citing Marx or Lenin is not a
problem for me if doing so clarifies the point or makes the point in a far
better way than I could do. What is wrong with that? I also happen to think
they represented the trend in the revolutionary movement that stood for the
interests of the vast majority of humanity, unlike Kautsky. That is
important surely.

Anyway I am not sure if this gets to the root of the problem I initially

David Yaffe

At 20:45 11/08/2010 +0100, you wrote:

>Hi David Y:
>I have no problem with anyone citing Lenin or anyone else. I have a
>problem with a historical pattern by Marxists of using citations by Marx,
>Engels, Lenin, Trotsky, Mao or other authorities to settle matters. This
>is not a criticism of you, but since you make a statement about the
>unintentional effect of using 'Leninist party' on discussion, you might
>want to consider whether there are unintentional effects on discussion of
>citing Lenin.
>Re your comment on the archives: actually, as your comment alluded to, our
>archives are *MORE* open than those of most other mailing lists, including
>the deplorable obscenity and embarrassing tyranny called 'Marxmail', since
>our archives identify the author of posts along with their email
>addresses. In this regard, I am reminded of the closing section of "The
>Communist Manifesto"....
>In solidarity, Jerry
>ope mailing list

ope mailing list
Received on Thu Aug 12 06:03:15 2010

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Aug 31 2010 - 00:00:02 EDT