-zz;;.

RAYA'S FINAL DIALOGUE ~ITH US: PRESENTATIOJf 7~RITTEN FOR THE JUNE _1, .1987-'

MEETii'IG OF. THE RESIDENT .EDITORl.l\L BOARD. . . \' ' - ~

(The lt'.anuscript Raya had prepared for ·~hat she intended to :.deliver .orally .\~aS· not checked by. her for presentation in printed form. It has not been edited, .except for obvious . typographica 1 errors.) . . ..

"Pre..;pre Post-P1enuin,_i:e. .to be given in three parts: ! • • The Philosophic Point

Executive Session Type. of Talk" . . ~

II. Dialectics ·of organi2·:ation III. · tintrOdden Pat~s in Organization

~-- . - .

·. The· <"haotic ·and informal form of presentation tonight is · not due to lack of deliberation and ·~orking out, mu~li. in. adYi!!lC:§l._

· .C)f the .time necessary to dra•v a balance sheet for the Plenum~ · · · ···· Rather, it is because so many different and yet interrelated , topics are reaching for. solution, that I felt it very necessary . to consult wit1l you in this seemingly "off the top of my head" talk. ·

I. The Philosophic Point

To understand today •·te must begin at the beginning, ·that is to say I as· .;i}ways, '"i th Harx. Specifically the two periods are: the first. and . the last.: the first being the philosophic moment, lS44. That laid the ground for all future development.

_The last being the long hard trek and process of development -­all tha Revoltlticns, as -~~ell as philosophic-political-economic concretizations~ culminating in capiti!_. Yet the fuli organiza-

.• tional expression of all came only then, i.e,, the last decade~ .. , especially the.l875 Critique of the Gotha Program. rqhy only then?·

.) ~ ...

Take first another look at 1844 -- the philosophic moment fo'r all of Marx's Marxism, including organization. Throughout

-Marx's life he :reached to concretize it·. But none of the concretizations, ·~hether 1848 •'!lith the Conununist League, or

·• '1864 •<lith _the •. Ji'irst International, or even 1871 •:l'ith the Paris . .. coir.ffiune,. full~· reached to the level of the philosophic moxnent of

··. 1844, · Only with the Critiaue of the Gotha Proqram in 1875 did · < • • •• ' ._,

Marx fully• return to that moment ar; it •::as concretized for . organization; and even .then, he did not call it· philosophy,

but< "prii::ciple. n ,, . ;-· ' -- ·-- -.

·_· ,·

-.--.;- - +' • . -.::~-

;.,_

'1

. •. f'

... -23-'1. ---:·.- •

'::;;r: ~ L'l1'fe<st:ecific point -thaLI '·m singling· o~t· ,f:i;q~ t;~e}:-,844 ·... . _foundL'1g'of a r~ew Continent o£· Though,t a~d:.?;,~~!fO~!.:fg.o,x:-,,!1>,:6;:,.· .­·wn~h-'viarx ·articulates: the: great>,~re-r:l.t,.f;fo.)~egel, i1)- .. rl~.~.~,Or'f~r}":~; .... -

·'the "nf!gation of<. thE: .negation11, :and .:tl:l,e. grE:ati :PE!~~;L:t,,p~ ,Fh~~fBiltlle

.·Hegel ·:tn -envelcfping•. it· in-·slicl:i mysHc~siii~b:Yi•Ae!:l:!:-,iti.&Lr..7~~~ ,;i:•::;_,,, • .': _ · ... _. it as various stages o,f. consCiousness. ra~hE!J:,-::.than ... ~f>; ,":n,e~ •. a!-14.:~~~n:_e~,:·. ' thillk.ing._ l~~Iarx, -on the---othez hand, ____ d_eclare~! hims_el~ n~t- on~!_:.··- ·-----·: against capitalism a1id ·"vulgar. communi.~!!l~.,:!but. ·~;'1:-ocli!.illl!!; · ·'-' .

·his' philosophy· to• be. "a ne~1 Humanism. 1 ~ ·• , .. • :•:''-•"': • ,• i .. c::; -, .'

· ···· 'l'o. this day ·1844 ·'"as ·the· philosophic.:: moment of.•.Marx\s;;',, •. discovery· of that. whole new-continent of -thought~and I()f,; :t;§lVOJu- .. tion that "Marxism" certainly lacked, and. ins.fead, sing·l13d .o)it · ~ of the developments -- economics;_.,.,,. so that, '"e -didn}t,,:kno•.;

·.: "net'! humanism" until. the Depression. But in :fact, it. is th~t · . which '"as the ground for organization tlu:·()ughou,t his life, from t!!«~ moment .he did ''experience" the p'!lilosop~J,C moment, even if it •·tas only correspondence (letters) sqon to become international

., .. · corresp·ondencc •' · ·_ · . ,._ ·.·

~~ ,-. . .. Seriously;·. hm.,.ever, . as :organization, and that· organization the' Communist. League~-- accepted .the challenge to :the " .... {_:·.

existing capitalist '"orld, and that not separated· from- alL ... , political tendencies. and parties. I'm referring, of course"· to the· Col!'.mtmist M<~nifesto,. •tl'hose second part .is. a·. crit~ictue :.of utopian· socia15.srn, etc. T'ihat ·'"e 11ant·to do here is to- C:WJ!IpO>.re the 184 7 Communist Manifesto t.o the 1864 First· International [and in 1871] hailing the :E>aris commune as tlie form, the working. existence, the communal non-state as naeding only release of all the rner.tal, manual and emotionaL potentiality~ .. · . ,: . ' .. _,_,, .. -

Ttl'hy then is '.the actual conc;,::etization of a _new un:i,:ty' s71 . . sharply critiqued):as in the .~otha Program? · Tha_t··p¢comes the. '"hole rub and urgent prllblematic ·of our, ·day '"hicr must :be .. '"or ked out. . . ·.

· First, enter history. In 1847 critique ·meant .the ruthless critique 'of all that exists that he spoke -of i_n_ his philo_sophic break 1.,rith ·the bourgeoi.sie and Hegel, . concretized on· the_ level of the existing "parties" in that. period. (As .:·~e w.are 'to see in 1860 in his letter. to Freiligrath, · w.hen Frei~igrath, in refusing to ·get •involved 'in .the .vogt Affair, said ·he -didn't. belong, .to. Uia party ·any longer.- : Marx's reply •.,ras: neither am .I 1 to .any exis'ting.party~ I didn',t,mean it in the.·epherneral sense,.I­meant ·it in· the historic.· •. Clearly, ~;arx _meant. that- no. one~, .. could re-write the history, and both ,the revolution of lMS-and' the Manifesto that anticipated it, are hist~ric.).. . ..

..

. ' --24:... if ~: .

·.· '·· ,.w.~;.~~~~'·k:,~~.~~~je_~~::o~!~~~t.:~~p;~~:±~~~~~~ghi·:a:!t~_-::.~:.t~~~M~~~c_•i.;:,.~;i_~,~ on··a~_·Qifferentt· _-donbfnerit~ ... :·That: .. :too:·· had a·:. .. .

; nb't: as;'bolcFaS. ''tl!e communist M<!nifesto, thouglit. Marx~,o~hi'ch;:was .. '·. actually 'the· preamble "to •the· constitution .and :;y,:,la.lfs~J:o J:~te,r:.' ·

··•·:·· .. , Fi.rst''Internafi'omfl'i-'':' · ""· >:: • coc:·' . •. ··•·x·,. · :. :< ·'li. ::..: :-.: .. :r .<:'·• .:i': , .. ··.-_;_~;! .. _-<::;~~ :·.- ......... ' .. - .. . ~--_ •... -. ' . ·---

·' .: .-:- -··-:r:: .. -~- · -.~ ::~ ·_; ·.·:· · • , · · · , 1 1· ,

. _,• - . ~ ·-~ ; .-:_,-\ ~ t\•_:,,:_·~-~:·,;·._f'_

,, . <At 'the'• sal!'e t'irne; Marx •didn It. hesitate a ·seooncLom:e .:th(!,L; Paris Cotnmuno ·broke out,,: arid some trade unionists .didn 1 t- shar.e ·

. . • - . - ·• l ... -·-· -. - -~ .... , -.- ..•.

the ent;l)usiasm:o· tO -~4l:ite _them out .. of the' First !n_tarriaticnal-~.-and •ilCit ·only to declare the need t:p go lower and .deeper;. but

; insist that 'they didn't represent the majority.:of• the roitsses:: the Paris cornmunards did, and it is that Idea· that defines : .:

. histOry now as· both ong.oing. and· the future. - .·· ... \~L' ... -: --_.;.. . .. . ;'::_; _,,- .

. -,;

II.'. Dialectics of Organization· · 'f-.

• .~·· i • '

' '·, . -~·-

So, what happened :ion 1875? Look at how the self-development of the Idea that ~~e · no••l call Marxism. has concretized· itself i~hem: ·its' gr.eatest theoret:f.'cal· •'mrk, Capita~/ in its French edition; is finfshed, and that has philosophy spelled out in the most' concrete· terms from. fetishism of commodities • to the· riew_ passions ·and· ne•~ forces that go against the accumul"!tion of

. capita 1',:<. And he has the experience now· of' both poli t;ica 1 · parties and· forms of organization emerging sp~ntaneously from . the''rnasses, :plus philosophy •

._,. . ; '

Crit~ of the Gotha • Program: There is no way now, no .matter heM Mal'X kept from trying to give <~ny blueprints for the future, not to develop a genernl vie•>~·of where·we 1 re headed for the da·.r after: the conquest of pm~er, the day after we have rid oursel~es ,. of the· b irthinarks of capitalism. when a ne•ll generation can 'finally ·see all its ·potentiality; put a'iiEiiid once and for· all to the division bet•,.een t:~~antal and manual labor.

·•-•; .. ·[Here on her outline for· the :talk, Raya had •~ritten: '.·:'"Let me:'riow state·sornething general from Hegel on the. question ·: oi The Philosophic Point which 'llOU.ld also apply to us."] . . · . ~:.-:.

·' .

' ''"" · · ni Hegellc;ui dialectics, the· philosophic moment is a. · determinantr' •even if the person who •>~as driven to articulate

··'the ·Idea •·of that •·"moment" •o~as· very ·nearly unconscious as. to .. ·its

·"'.·:,

. de'pthand its ramifications. it remained the element that - .. ·· . <

govcilrned the 'co~retlzatfon ·that 'follt~ws the. laborious birth::·· ' ''tli\l'f''poured ,'forth· i~ a torrent nevertheless. ·· .. · · .• · · ....

.:zs-· ..

Specifiea lly_ and~ C.OA9~9-~'i! ly,. i~l, q_ur .ca_SE!: ~!le.' mop~ep.~,.g;m ' . . referring• :to: :is May-cl2-; anl!li 20_;. 1953;. : 'l'he: Idea; ,iij!,.-}.n 1i) ~·; ;:);;rr:.:T: · demystifying• the Absolute; as· either· God• or. t)le clolleft pnt~1.9.gy:, ;._;. · · as the un1 ty I sing led .out 1 a :au a 1 mo:vem!'lnt-, · frqll\ the_ocy -~o,,; <;.t'' ,_: . .­Pt;a•~tice-,•.- from practice as: "lell. a.s:.·from .. t;heory._:.,: <::. ": :;;. :cl:;.::: :-·:c ·

:::r. :~: ;'.: .. ~· ,,·,-·_-,_,._,_~,_ .. -.• ; __ r:'~, .. ·.,'-. ',~_-_-- ~-·· .: ... :~::~·-.~-,~1-;.·=---· • - - - ' .' . ·:.. . -- -- .. :'-.-~· ~ -----'-'··-•0::_.:_. __ .-J: :'U_;;'--.

· · ·.We· were: so over<t~helrned '-'rith: therino:veJ!lent fro!l)'•PX:?,cUce_ :':;::: tha_t •,;e wer(i! h~rdly_as. ent~u~ia_sti_<:; or• as~:o':lc_rE!t~-.:ab.?ut j:hE!·: r, · mo·Jell\el1t' from theoryt · if not :actually. forgetting it., :1\ ri:o< u: .· therefore· t·!ish_ -.to· ::;c _.IritC) :;reat---~etail--~-a:ocut~:th6ii~~ -t~·~o--_-~tett~rs~-=<---"-_. in i9s3·: ~as the- smal{coin oFcoricre'te,q~e·stions;'hu(ks~>:~-: .. the many Universa }.a inherent in. it, so that ·~e~·can :· see''wnat 'i.s~::.

'·still-n·e1.,i in it. that ·~e must ,,Clevelop for the_ bqo~·. -~- · ,, ;·• · ·i·, '~ _:.----· •. _ ~ • ·:_-.·~; _·:-·_·:.:-;·:!<:·.~·;.'t·J.i·i~L;

:~·

E'!!eryone has heard so much ab'->l~ 195.3 as :die.~stage~:qr.;;-·~~;.}-~ treakthrough on the- Absolute I.dea that.yd ,ll'.ay -thi*; ;, "?Jl.a.~,"'' : else •is •there to. be' said?' The ·~hole poir.t. •hOI~ev_er.,·. ab_out otqe ~·-· ·.· ~hilosophic point that became a philof?ophic qete:r."'llil'l.a.nt, 1 :a~d, •·> not just the ·gro\tnd ·of, :but became so -st<lrtlingly ~ew ~n~. cleal:'<. •t~ith Ma'rx; that .lookina. at ·it for this .aae. specificallv •. our., .. , ... selves, it began to appear in an a ltog~-ther n~W: wa:~< ti~-re··;rs-~-~;; ,_.,hat · I mean: ..

-, ·-:

Heretofore •tJhat ~~e. stressed. •h'hen •tJe pointed to 1953 a's .. ·· source ·~as the important point of. 1955; •t~heti- there was im · actual organizationai break-•ip; ·. Then what became clearer

, c ~-

was that actually,--·:i.nsofar ·as. the words "Marxisi:-Humanism", . are coricerned,. 1~e couldn't s~y 1Q55, b~t as it •·1n.s .expressed· . .ili written form--in Marxism and ·Freedom. (M&F) in 1957. :~!ow .~hat.: i.r. clear is not th<1t any of the other dateS" are \~rong 1 put that: each time· .it . is a specific period that makes. one realize, .that . actually ••hat --~aim' t clea.c •>~at? ·•o~hat ,was_ in the ,philosoplli~: , . - · moment, • and only ~ the objective and subjective merges_· is· it "proven"; Oh,-the·source 1 ·the ground' really-.also had·.a· roof •.. But the context ·in bet·~een, the structure I couldn't be . controlled without the objective situation.- But that •. on the other hand/ inade it very. clear tr.at ••e ~re b~ck .tc fodusing ·· .

·on- the phi-losophic moment. · •.;· , , . , , ' . ,: . :, · ... : -· '- .

. ·· ~987.c_MID THE IMPERATIVENESS OF, BOTH .THE O~JECTIVE,~._;., ".:': SUBJECTIVE URGEfiCY NOr'l MANIFESTS T"i!AT.• '.ffli\T HAS,BEEN AN UN-TRODDEN

: _._--. ~·, ~ . - • - - --·~ ._, I:·.~· '-'

P]ITH ALT. THESE YEARS, BY ALL. POST-MARX, MARXISTS,10 INCL'9DING , . , .. LENIN',;...; tffio: DID DIG !NTO PHILOSOPBY, . BUT NOT TilE PAil:1·I.,. :P,~' - . , LUXEMBURG,: NHO D!D DIG INTO SPONTANEI'cy', ·!JUT: NOT ;t'~i,:.~~OPir.{.; ,:._: .-

•_lS ·· o~Ni~TION ,·: the Dialectics. of Philosophy· and. O:cganizitfon. "••·•,:.~.!'•:·~::·~-~-· •.,.:,-" lo- , .. ', . . ~

,: •' •; -,,;~~ , ·; :;!" • ; : ·~---,,.

_ ( T~hy did. we: 'i:hi'* 'OnCe \~e' tOOk; the; big Step Of sepa~at.iqg~: .~, indeed hreaking;·c·with 'the: elitist· party,,. that it, is .~Jlffic,i!"nt .

. to do so politically •..-:l.thout doing so philosophically? · ' · · ·

10740''

.i ~

"

....

··.'· -26- .c

_ 'T'..-ai!n'• t 1 t., because·· we' actua uy· had. nol:qienatra tadl'thenc:~, · dialectic of otganiza:tl.on in its reta'tionsh'ip .to. dialectiCs of\·:·!. philosbphy0 't:hiic.gh i.fe' cei:l:airi.ly never S\:Opped using the': '(i'Ol:d ·;:;,·: 1~· "dialectics?" 'In'·a· '"ordp e'l(en '"hen we. used ~'I>.bsolute".: .In· . -• _

. relationship to method and definiti:rly' stressed. that we do;- ri:ot:. mean just a tool or application, ,.,.e_ did think that it 'tlas not just the threshhold o~ the.: Absolute· Idea;' but :the Absolute :Idea as its· ultimate, as if· Absolute' Mind was no more than .what·· . ::::; :

-Absolute :i:dea '"as ""In the'· "Lagle"· and HegeL didn.• t: need :to,-telh " us tha·t we. better not stop there· and instead .go. to !'PhilosophY•:.: ·; of Nature" and "Philosophy of ltind." ,. · :· ·,.,< ,-,'

• ~-'' : ' :' - • f ·, • • • ': ·,

No wonder :that· '"hem CLR James said' that he looked into ; ; 1 · Philosonhy of·Hind, he concluded that he found nothing there "for us'." . 'I must have 'felt dissatisfied, since that is ·.where ! •~lent·,· anq ·ptecisell;, I might say, on the question of ~hat' we 'c.a lied '"di~!lectics Of the party,'" specifyir;g hot1ever, ;that 'I , ,. .·· ~asn' t. interested .either in the_ mass. party, which ·the lllasses ; • w111 bui-ld, or in the elitist IB rty~ · •11hich ·we 'definitely oppose, but in what 'happens to a ·small group "like us" 1~ho kho;,. .that.;; nothing can be done •dthout'the masses, and are ·~ith :them, ·but::: they are theoreticians and they al~ays seem to be around too. · So, •11hat is .the objectivity •11hich explains their presence, as the objectivity explains the spontaneous outburst of the w.asses? In a t·IOJ:d, I 1-1as looking for the obj~ctivity of subjectivity •.. :.

The one thing. :i: did not mention in discussing. 1953 is that the letter of ?o!ay··2o, ·~he:.e I suddenly speak on the_ Philosophy of Mind, came ·after CLP.J had said inrhis Notes .,­"'Orthe letter. accompanying. his Notes ;..._ that he 'had ·loe>ked. into: l?hiiosophy of Mind,. and found nothing there "for us" (naturaliy that means Johnson-Forest Tendency). ' so· why did :i: go to ·the

. Philosophy of l~ind -after. connecting. the end of the last ,_few, pages of Science of Logic Nith ·pllilo·sophy of Mind? And that ~Tas directly after I just repeated ~hat JFT had ·~o.::ked_ out,_·: that ·Lenin' said Marx's. development in the section. of commodities not only bore resemblance to Hegel's. syllogistic UPI .. [Universal..,Particula:-:-Individual], but moreover, what is .fu;rther to be noted is- that just as Lenin had noted that Chapter One -­and we noted 'chapter cine ii:icluding fetishism bore resen-hlance tcFOPI _..:. so the:accuniulation of capital, its G1neral Absolute. La•11, was-based· on the Absolute Idea, holding tha~ j~:st as that ·· meant<tnE!'iiialectic·of bourgeois society,· its: end by _the .revolt

· of thg'w~rkers; so Marx "also set the limits to the ~if!lectic . of.'the:,·party~ • •>~hich .is ··part· of bourgeois society, and ~ill wither

- aw~:,; with the passing of the bou~:geoisie. · •• " Therefore; i1hat we we rEi' !iorking' on "'as not 'just a boo¥:• but: a philosophy,·, a wllole

. new' phi.lo'so'ph~/ of di.hfectics for. oW: _age: of post .. ~'{WII; il!ld <,; • • • •, .'; .>•·:·.· ."·~ ;: .. , ,,,.~ '·.' ·, • .,..r ;,,

' .:.:....

... :

10741

-27:"~-

that, Of C01lrse; tne!!nt. cracking the Absolute.d}l'hat ci!'! cWhere; . we all stopped. CLRJ .promised he ~10Uld .do:.·it; but he- didn 1:t. Instead, he said he had-looked into the Philosophy:of:Mind and found nothi.ng iri there ··for us·. ·: · ·. ·· .: . \· ;''''< -,;

' ' ' ' ·-·· __ .. , ; ,""' ·-~- ,·

So, whatever-·it -wa·s -that ·was 'driv-ing, .me .in .. lSSl; to •.write those letters of·May 12 arid May .20;:·dt suddenly be'came :the,., ... · whole of Hegel's work, beginning, as• always,o,~j,th what ··1'1a:i:x said was most important in !?henomenology of'-'Mindi going · :· .-. thrC:·'lgh the Science· of:Loctic with Lenin, ;but refusing to ·follow· either Lenin in that. last paragraph;·. or CLRJ. on. the .fact.:tpat he found-nothing in Philosophy cif·Mind, and. delving notronly' .· intc. that •11ork, but il')to those last final syllog:i:siis:,that . ; nobody: _ i~c).uditig_ bour_gecis ncadaritia, -had ;:seriotis!I:--:tCidkled ~,i:hE!! next decade. I was not debating them; or what· they cUd or did not do('in this case, my "ignorance"- saved me from.having'to

.argue .with them or anybody, but, again it:was'·Marx who, though. he broke off, his manuscript before the final. secti:on- of • ;·" Ehilosoplw of· Mind, his very sharp digging -into Capital; ·: ., _ _. ,especially.~t!1.e general· law.-·of capitalist-··accumulatfOn an~:-:th~ -· new passionsand new·forces, ledrne to conclude suddenly that the dialectic of· the Party as well as of the contradictions..: in the Absolute Idea itself, resulted in my seeing what I. ealled "the new society," i.e~ the end of the ·division between:·mental and manual.

Thus, that philosophic moment was the core for those. heretofore formative years of News and Letters corr.rnittees .. which ended with the completion of ~, where we saw that- the little phrase "the movement : f;r;om practice" set the .·whole structure of' MEr.F_. Not only that: it served bot;:\; as ground: and. :::oof for. the analysis of the contemporary world,- both, theoretically and· ·· practically, including the altogetper.,new V(lices from both_ the proletariat and the· ne1o1 revolts in :the_ Comrn.,.hist .world, as.-well as the Black Revolution r;ght here in the_u~s. I'm sure I .don't have to repeat that to·this day that first aditio~ had one banner-raising event of world'historic importance, by including the first translation both of Marx's Humanist Essays ·and Lenin's phil osopbig Notebooks.· .

: ~\.- . . ; . . '" . . . . ; .~ (Here Raya. said.•.,--. on June 5, from her hospita~ ·bed --:-:

that she wished'-to include parts of. her "Theory/Practice'.~"f:!clumn written that day. She called special attention to the paragraphs below:

.· ,_.

·.: ;:r_ returned to the final Chapter 12 ·of-~ Luxernburrfi ·Women • s Liberation and Marx' s Philosophy , of Revolution• Its :penultimate para,gr<\ph .read:_

It .isn • t bl:lcause we are any, "smal·ter" that we can see so much mora than other post-Marx

~ j '

10742-

_.,' -28;,. ·,,--

· · · ·· · Marl(i·stt·~; :,~:-·R-ather;·! :.i't .- fs:_ beCause :-Of-: the a ma.tui:ity ·~-~~' _ . -cif.·-our age;';: It is-·true·that-ot:her.·post::.,;;M:!rx ."Dc.::;c.::" r.• .. "'"-

<• Marxists· haver rested on ·a •. truncated. Ma:r)!:.!.sm, •::i.t.- ····· . . .. is e~ilaiiy true that no o.ther ge11erafion. couid u., .. : .· , . , . .o.: ha.ve seeri the problematic of our age, much less _ .. · ·

· sol.ve: our 'problems. Only ·:li·ve human :·beings can .... :':· : ::-:· .. recreate .the revolutionary. dhlectic forev:er··anew.•·'c: •. i ·', And, -these· l:!ve ·human beings must do: so in theory: •<' '' .. as •11eU as iri prac~ice. It. is not a· q\.1estion 'only,

.. ' .. -:-.. . .

.. • 'of meeting· the·.challenge .from pr~ctice; hilt 9£·'·: :-being ·able: to meet the challenge from .the. self-" developmentoof .the Idea, 'and· of deepening:,theory · t.o the· poiii:t :where it. reaches ·Marx •. s . concept of .

. the •Philosophy :of "revolution in permanence •. " ' ':: ~ ..

It was at that point that :I asked .that ·the following paragraph be added: · . . , . .·

"There: ,is a· further. challenge to , the, form of , , organization which we have ~~orked out. as the c9mmittae~, '. ·

. form ratherthan.the. 'partv-to-lead.'. B\tt;,.tnough 'corr.nlittee-form ami 'party-to-l~ad' are :.opposites, ·they are· not. absolute· opposites. At the point when the theoretic-form reaches philosop4y, the challenge dero.ands that •>~e synthesize .uot only .. the. ne1~ relations --of theory ·to practice, and all the forces of · revolution, but philosophy' .. s 'suffering, patience and labor of the negative, • i.e. experiencing .. absolute negativity. Then and only thEm 'ftill .. l~e succeed. in-a revolution that ·~ill achieve a class-

.· less, non-racist, non-sexist, truly humnn, truly new, society. That which Hegel' judged to be the synthesis of the 'Self-Thinking Idea' and the .'Self­Bringing.;.Forth of Liberty, • Marxist-Humanism holds, is what Marx ·had called the ne•~ society~ The many "paths- to get there are not. easy to. ·~ork out ••• "

~

Now return to our o•m si tua_tion,"' and. think. of . the attacks that· ·~e will be facing. in 1987, when we state openly that even the one post-Marx Marxist·

__ revolutionarv. ~tJho ,did reach deeply- into philosophy .,;_ Lenill ·-- ~evertheless · did not do so en the . ·

· · ·question' bf orgar.ization. In truth, he never :i:e.n6U:nced his position. on the vanguard party 10et out in 1902 in What is to be Done?, though he often ::ritiqu.ed i.t himself. He profoundly extended

. 'his new breakthrough in philosophy· to a concretization . . - • ... -.~., ._ ._ •• ~ . . ·, ; l· . . - • - . . .

. of trie' d:.alectics ·.·of .. revolut1on; _arid yet ·nev.er changed his position'cn the·zieed•for the !thin layer

~ :: ..• " . . ~· --· ~ '· .· ..

·'·.

10743

._, ..

-29'--·.

of· Bolehev_iks • .• as· a' vanguard· party,; org:mi_za_t:!..on.--,.c,.:. x·n 1982' •in Rosa Luxemburg,- Tifomen' s Liberation ,, __ , _._ "· and MarX! s •Philos-ophy of . Revolutfon,·.: •>i.e ~J:it~queC!,. ,,_.,.; .. I.en~n~poHtically.• Torfully work.oub.th~c:.d~aJ,ec,";",,., . -~··• tios,.·o£· philosophy and organization fo_r · O!lll:· ~ge,,,:, ,: ·i ,, • , ··:•i. it is no1~ _clear. that tha_t c:rit;iqua -mus.t A.f.:g ,-_~eep._._.,,,.,, - ..... ,-_, _., philosophically. · · · ·· ·-· ····· · . - ... _:_

.·:. ~:<_y:.. -.· ; ,::~ ~::,:-: .. ,_., ·: ~- ._, ~- ::·~--~ ,, · The: whole 'truth .is .that· ev_en, Marx' s- Critique:, of,,., __ ,-',, '-•"''' :­

the Gotb<..-Progrs;m;, •t7hich remains the, ground fo.r ,,_-., ... ,,, · d : · organization· today,: •t~a:s written 1l2 years ,:ago,.,, ·-~o: : ,c),-;•-, :,_.;'-_. ~'lhat.- is demandedi:is ·not .. mere: ::'updpj:ing1 \ :after.:. , __ , •:::s'' __ ,. all the :abo:cted 'revolutions of tre post tiorld,War : • .. , :"' : . -< • ·

. _ U }~Or1d, .·'Ground' .. 1-dll- not- suffic; alone;, ~~-.h<iv~_;_r, :r.: .:~· . to 'finish_ the ·rbuil<,iing- ,-- thea roof and. its contents. · , ._; . ·: , •.

. ThiS is ·~hat I am working on .-no•A7 :,in' th,; ·Dialeeti~S' . ,::.:. : ::,:;. of Organization' arid ·Philosophy. I ~1ould -~ppreci'a·t;e_";;·;:,j:· ,''; · hearing from our readers on their· thoughts on·, this.: ·.-. :, ·, ',,,

!'. : . ,· ... : :' - ·~ '.

-:-June s; 1987]. ' '·~, • r (

Now -theri,. it seems to. me ·thi!t in a certain· sense· we· could call it a shock. for''me to have expe.rienced _·th~fi- in .. · ~: < .

this year 1987, ·-~hen a great dea:l of research .,,as dozj:e· by ofehar~ --Eugene, Mike; Peter, cyrti:s, Kevin, sheila, -olga ·-:-.on the,l\lC!ny, Wuys that Spontaneity appear~d in the ''forms Of councils,· SOViets, committee.s, communes, and so forth, .not 'C?nly to say _the: ._.· ... -generalization: Yes, the party arid the forms· of organization­are opposites; but t;:h_ey are not absolute opposites, The char.ge in the title 'to Dialectics <£ organi_zation and. Philqsophy really means that 'the absolute opposite is philosophy, and that •tie have not· yet '-'IOrked out organizationally, -Because •••..

. . - .

Take Pannekoek. The council coroinunists ·~ere certainly earlier on the scene and directly opposed ]:.enin in a friendly .. way, on the question of a single form of organization, 'insisting that 111hen if cow..:..:f to production, the people at the point of production must maintain their power after the revolution.· But, did they ever give up their. party?· Didn,' t: they~, along with., Rci~a- Luxemburg,· tpink that_: spontaneity is no s)lbstitute· for the ·~hoteriess·of internationalism and theory? ,on,tb,e contracy,···they took that for gra;1ted. · Nhat·.not •. only: was- nut. taken for·grarited, b1lt never even approached in any way . t-Thatever, unless one calls' "approached"· a .total rejec_t;ion, •.>~as,.

:philosophy. Except, excipt, except... -

The except, of course, refers to Lenin. But he too kept' ~· · ·to cild and Plekhanov '~hen. it came to Russia.

.-.:.. .10744-. j

--':'· -·-;:_<:·:;): •f'"

.. /f.'· -3(1-

One must· not•hem • in a nei:.,·auaHty .. i~to: an· old;r.eali.ty,,, because of the Simiiari_:ties' of abstract opposites .eol1ii<!ing~ It is the collision of co!lCrete oppos:ltes·tha·t::"demands;a ne•-1 unity. ~<l'ithout that; philosophic. ;~oment th~re ~:.,;:·n-ci~:way,;j:o, i he•.; out a ne•il path• • And foi:< Lenin there :,.;as no' philos.Ophic; moment insofar as: <:)rgariizati6n was concerned. ., ..... <: ': ,;,:- ' ;

In the. case Of organization, every Left was grabbing at SOi'ne old COntradictions·,' and '"ith them,· SOme. old SOlUtiOI~s. .. Nhich is •·1hy the m:ost'·cogemt moment for our problemitic; and for showing up more than ambivalence in Le!li.n,· ''Tas :the f~c.t;.

·that Pannekoek {and Gorter) 1 ··'lith tha'!:•cre'ative .. new· concepj:

~ r '' :· r- '-·: :· ; :'·."· . --~

Of COUncil COilt!l\Ull~Sffi, i.e. p0•-1er in·.the hands .Of the :W9rkers at the point of.p:f.oouction, came'·the old, ·-v-.:.:tgarized,···.abysmally · · · m:1r.ro•t~, ·iinperia listie :philosophy· of Lenin's -·1908 Materialism and. Empiria.:..'criticism, · as against Lenin's great new philosophic breakthrough. on the Larger Logic, and as if that self-movement of ideas and of people •1as a "betrayal'' of the class st.ruggle. And to th~.s day, that is ~~hat council communists are s•t~earing h'\1 (~c.o T.on·.;.,..: . .,.- ... n't...!'l ____ ,_e") -... ., --- _._ • ., .... ~• "-'..,. ·r.J.J..t..LVDVf.Jll L •

Lenin, too, never raised philosophy directly in relation­ship to organi>:ation. It was :at· most a phrase, like the famous reference in the Tra;'!e Union Debate, •o1hereh~ brings. in~· ·in a· general: •-1ay only, dialectics and eclecticism {sec page 65 of Volume IX of Lenin's Sel"!cted r.zorks, on "a glass cyltnder"),

And the epigones have been busy trying to say that whereas it was ·co:crect .for Lenin not to touch the guestion of· the party when· there •·1as the. great phenomenon of Soviets, "we" must no longer avoid the lluestion of party. ~"/hereupon, they end up. just •'li th t•o10 more reasons for being in favor of the vanguard party.

III. ·conclusion: Untrodden Paths .in Organizai;ion

In a single <4ord~'. •ve. must go into. these untrodden paths.· :T<J'e must·not, I J;"epeat !!E!E. not, look fora crutch just because· a. ·;ne•.ll' epigone is using the "lord "democracy" to mean more' than~·one· party, and. a Ma.o is espousing at one and the sall".e time; ·"bombard the headquarters·". and ''the Party .. remains " the ··."al'ig1lard": c+ vs. bureaucratization •• ·.}. ..' . ... . .

·.- ·:·(,:

. ' : -:: . '·.

10745·.·

. '

-31.,.

·since Marx himself .laid the ground-- and that, remember, is 112 years. ago.,:-'.., ,in _o~he~ •>~ords, the whole ()f. pos~-Mar~ <-:- .. . Harxisni'beginning ~itJi ·Engels .has: not. built o)'i that: gro.11n~~ · ... ·" And Eng!'lls,.you. musf: rern~mber, di.d fighl£ .h~rd·t() have th~: ; ... .

-·--~~---··---~-----J,._.,_ ~ ·' . ,· __ · .-.- .. -: .~·.l",;,.,t;.:'"-r-

Critigue of\t_he Gotha Pr-ogram published~ if.in.~''moderated" : \, ·. ·:: form, .and yef ·'assented .to· the establishm.,;rit o:f \he. second )j .

\Intermitiorial.. And the. Germali soCial nemociraC:y had b~e:~; · · ··.··~· forced to. publis1i.. it; . but . oniy :as. a . "contiibutioh . to 'the ! ,.; : .. ' '

discussion ·~~.· ~ni-. ~-~. g- ,.;:,...,,...~ .;:·.,... .... ;;..· ___ ..:...: --.a...i·-n ·t:: -: ... · · · · · .··;- ·:_·· - · .-,.~\:t . I : -.---: __ :- ... · ..,...,.~,..,..., '~v~;, U.&o.~QU·':'~ -...a.V.L_, •· , ,-_·' •:" ., :: :! ;-. r_ --~

Lenin did ieturn to Marx; s. roots in Heg~l, and 0did' ~ee'·

that the CritirTue of the Gotha Proqrarn had 'never really beri .. ·.' : concretized as .the smashing of the bourgeois f!taj::S!, with!)ut . •t~hich you .could. not have a =evolution~ . In a ~1ori:l,' he. c'erta~nly •t~orked ciut the dialectics of revolution, .and made it be 1n' . ·' Russia. But,- but, but :__ hedidn'·t touch the quest:i,on.of the party • Qn the Contrary 1 it ,didii 1 t e:veri gO as: fat aEi ,hiS c?.wn. .· varied critiques of T'1hat · is 'to be Done?, -once the Bplshey:i,ks.' -gained .P()'"'e.r_ •. · ... · ... - . ___ ._._, .•.. ·., . _ .. ·· ·.,

'. . . .

!~ith Rosa Ltciemburg, women's Liberation and t-larx' s Philosophy·of Revolution, Ne alone showed that Marx had created tha philosophic ·ground for organization~·. But we. need''--· not only. ground but a roof. And •>~e have all these 112 years of' void on organization and philosophy. There. is no time in a nuclear age to put it off foranother day.

1988 .. is the year of the book, . and not as in 198.0 just as ch11llerige to post-Marx Marxiots, but the actual presentation of the. di(!lectics of' philo'sophy .and the book as one, . and for ·• that it needs a •-1hole organization, and not just the author. The whole does not mean.~ :•

'· .The real point is· the meaning that this is not'a question

of the 11 2Uthor, ".but the ·~hole organization·. I •,rant to'stress the '"ord, .-"the. whole," not~ in." the. sense that ~ach one is going · to write a chapter, but rather that the COntE!Xt Of each person's aCtiVity c;nd. Special pOint. 0~ COncentratiOn.-- be it labor I . •

r-romen • s Liberation, youth; Black,' etc. -- will be: inseparable from the meaning_ of that activity~ and that meaning, ·;.,.hether of an objective event or the subjective activity, will he

. projected to those not-yet-l·~arxist-Humanists,· because in meaning, i.e. philosophy, is both ground and roof of all we do, survey, ,strive for, as we prepare for that "revolution in permanence."

':-_. '

- ~··

10746

"'.;.

j -·

l,:· .- ,,,. .-.. -

I \i~rtt to_ re'peat, because philosophy had not pe\:1ne~ted ' -· the pape'r,< tliere£dre, it didn't· permeate the e:;r:ganiliatiori~·:· ''- ''"'

' . - . . . - . . . ' . - ~

-Tli")tefore; I i~ould vecy ·strongly suggest tha't the· ·•

Plenum _corlsider that ~egim1ing in January, 1988 ~oie' become'. _;; a monthly' t;;113lve'-page paper in' a very -ne•>' •o~ay. ·~here the ·book . ' :(

. Dialectics of ·Philosophy and organhation -- becomes -t;_he' -- __ ·:,::c'"'->!;-;/' dominant force not only in essay-articles, :but in every activity we undertake,, especially in discussions with subscl"ibP.rs, · with not-yet Marxist.:.Humanists, not just as the recordin-g of the events and th•Hr experiences~ but the meaning of those - · · events and expertences and their direction in a global context.' That is what ~~e '"ill ha\'e to project when we have conversatiolis •oti th subscribers. That is '"hat has been missing '-'- the '"hole new concept of "post-Marx Marxism as a :· ~"'jorati.ve" --.it just laid· there. in Rosa Luxemburg, Tv omen 1 s Liberation and Man: 1 s Phil'osophy of Revolution. _

To assure that such essay-'-art icles •o~ould be forthcoming,-: we ought to sugg&st or have people volunteer in September at the ,Plenum, on •r~hat they 1~ould do for the issues beginning c

in Janua::-y, 1988. I have had a chance to· speak to _some ori this already.. By raising it this .early I it means I not .. :· only wa;at 'to hear from you today ;'but •rle • .,ill continue. the •. discussion at the next -REB, ·~hen'I will_ bring in a· draft of: tile Plenum Call. And_once ·the Call is out, then the :fun· Plenum discussion is open to all •

. -~

-- -~. .. ,-

-·-· ••. ,,!

. ''.

much in a'dva§e of the. time • .nece,ssary to.draw a balanc~- ·.· ®ntf#'~'-" ' ,

s.heet for the~ •.. Rather, it is because so many different.

and yet inted,"elated topics are & !I reach~ atsol-- ..

. . ~ . J . . . . ~-' / .. ~\ ution, . that I r71t it very necessary to ~wj.t\Lyc~m} · · ··

. ~~~ly ~\off -~he top-ri£ "" head' • :C , • .. • •• .• · ·t::s'"""'"~~-'-:"'­--- ~--:trf. wm.t, i""a-i::eutl~ up ts'wer f".Jl>TERUtif' •. • ..... . : ·.- ·, . \0 -. '-. .. . ' . . . ·.

most· im!Jortant deletions is leavih'B' out

' the objective situation. will of course be discussed

in.·the ·

Put

the type that I genera do not present until the Executive

Session at the end of /

Humanism , as philosophy, ' I '

··~lenum. It is us, i.e. Marxist-' \

as paper, as

book-- the~. last is th'e. most

begin at ·the beginning, ti"at is to with Marx • .@}.

tJIW~-~- , [d-~riods~_~the~ and~ ~s~: tt!':t: ,be~ Il~ .. ,; __ ) J.. P • ,f....U -«dW:.W-ctc4-~gL(lu~ rr::'-

~ philosophic moment, 184'\'~st being !@~:~;a ~l.JI . !'.\ ,)

_long hard ~ ~ P,roc;;,~s of development b"' · ;'a,)l&t~r'!Eeat •

.ij'if~lllaF all the ~evolutions, as well as philo¥'phi~-~

-----

~ ~-~~ v, '\.w-. 71€- -· political-economic concre~\.:1~ ~/(1> §&$Jt: ---~- c:r1_Ut !Ef:i?t/JIWV ~ -:~11 organizational expre~~ 1844 --

thephi·· .. l.osophic.~_'tf!~ ent .fo_r all of Marx's r~a!'Xis. m,, including 5"'C.!roTI/Ir·~v•'i, ~~- . . . .

. o_rgahjz at ion. Throughout Marx's life he reached· to concre-

it. But the concretizations, whether 1848 with .:"· ... _ ..

•• »

. -;

( -z"l· -~.-~ '·

. '· . . -:; ~·

.ithe J::otiimur.ist League, or 1864 with the 1st Interri~t::~;on!.·; or 'eve~ 11371 ~ith the Paris Comrnune~ed to the le,e 1. · · ..

·of the philosophic moment of 1844.· only with .the cri:t;:ique

of the Gotha Program in 1875 did Marx fully ~ return to

- _,·

th~'t·.~moment as it was concretb::ed for organ,ization .•. ang . " '<· -· ,__£all. it philoosph:y:, but J · •• · ·• •... • .. · .•.

not zrp=z=--;~~::~::?*i w- '!princiJ1e''. even them, he did

The specific point that I'm singling oi:it from the ....

1844 founding of a New continent of Thought and of Revolution · · , the · ·

is when Marx articulates ~eat.,_ ~erit of Hegel' in

discovering the "negation of the negation" and the.great

demerit of this same Hegel in enveloping it i~ '::5Jq(~lE ·mysticism by i"dsbnsmtiiRia:eg:lt. dealing· with it as various

stages_of consciousness,

Marx, on the other hand,

as men and women thinking~· against

onl:r 2'6 z .. L1: e'GiOi?

cap it({. ism· and "vulgar communism" ,:5_2!;lllldlillli!D

his philosophy to be "a new Humanism".

but proclaims

--- i

••• - ! ••••

,,. -

;!· ::.~ '/ .. ;: . ..

· ' ")_ -~~~o tMs :~ay the 1844 ., was ~- philosophic · moi:nertt. of

.dis~o,;ecy .of that whole new continent .of thought and of re-- ., . . .

volution that-~ ".f.larxi~m" certainly lacked and instead sin-

gled ~:--of- the developments • -MI .• •' . ·. \l . ' I( ..

. ~that ~e didn't kno"' new humanism until mt li• the. De-·

·pression. But in fact, it is that "'hich was th~C_3rou~ ·'

'for organization :throughout his life/the moment he did -....

· "experience" the 1!:11lliii'Cii'IIQillll'"'"t- philosophic· moment, even if it

was only correspondence ( lett<:ll:'S) :.-·· socn: inter- ---

national corresppndence.

~Seriously, however, as .organization, ·and that organi­

zation --.communi~-- accepted the challenge· to the

existing ·capitalism world~ 'and that not separated from all

' ·. pciiitical _tendencies and parties. I.'m, ~f course, referring

to the Commun~st Manifesto, whosl!!. second part is a critique'

of utdlpianism .socialism, etc. What we want to do here is

' ·to corn.Pare the i:85i 1847 CM to the 1864 B2 First Internmtion-·-· /.. • 1' .·

" ·/ -.

~~,Db hailing the. PC ·as !M form, the working existence, .. ; ~~- ~' ... ' .

. 'the commun!!l non-state as needing only relaase of aH... the

i .:ntal, ~n~i ond e~tionol potent,.lity~hen io * ·• f·'the 'actuali:· concretization lll:f of a new unity so sharply

·.,_. . ,·' ')·_-

__ .. _ .. ,

. .. -~ ·-.~.; . . ,· -·~

101750

···.\ccW:f.": ,--.• ~ .

·iri' ·the Gotha ·c. Progralllllile? •'i'liat; beclo11119s·.):li.C, ~-... ~.- ~. . ' . ;•_,

. wlioie !:ub ·and :th~· .urgent proble~ti~ of our .

• be worked out. .•

history~'j;in 1847. criti.q\le meant /~Firs~, i£ • t! enter

. ruthless critique of all· that exists .. that lle lll~p spl)k~ in .his philosophic break with the bourgeoisie anc1 B:egel':.·- .

cont:retized on.the level of the existing "parties" in that,

per~od. . (As we were to see in 1860 in his letter to Frei.,., ··

lingrath, when Freilingrath~ in refusing to get involv.ed

on the Vogt'Affair, said he. did?'t belong to'the party any

longer. Marx 1e reply was, neither· am I to ·any existing •. in the

party. I didn't mean it/ephemeral sense, I BaNK meant it

in the historic~~ Clearly, Marx meant ·that no orie could

re-write the history, and both the revolution of 1848 and

t)le Manifesto, that anticipated it ·Blld followed it, are

historic).

~- It is that historic period that changed when interns­

/ t:nal workers got togethel:' to take a position on what was ;··. happening on a diff~rent continent •. That too had a "mani-

'1 festo", 'perhaps not as bold as .CM thought Marx, which was

· actually the preamble to the constit~ti on and by-law to ~

,-:·,·

t.he First ·xnternatdlonlll • . i .

. - .','_ - ·-~' .'"·'·, . '

· ... ,AT ~ SAME TIME Marx. didn't£ hesitate a second .,.

once th~ 'i'C burat<6ut, and.some trade unionist didn't

~h~r~ 'the enthusi&am, to ¥;lliSi!k write them out of the

.. :;-.,::'"'--

r ,

··,,

that defines. hictory both ongoing<

// j!Bf2~-, look at· how_ the self:.:developmOnt

)• ' :. ' . -, .,.·.· .. · .. · .. '~o, what happens in .1875 ;.._

o'f the· IIi Idea th~t we no'<i calli! Marx:i.sn1 has con · et:ized it- ' · . . . . . . . . ' l 1\/,ir. qir' J' ~ eel~ i~ grea~est t:heoreticai wo~ s fi:ished, and ...

that has philosophy spelled ·out in 'the-_most concrete-t~rmi1

<- from ~h!_~oditievto the new passi~ne nnc1 new _

forces that -IJII!lxml::th go against the accumulation of capital.

·And. he has the experi!mce :w o~ ~\t~~s) and fo~ns .. o~ r .. 07~tyzation emerging spontaneously from the 'masses ~r7 "?f7 [),There is no way now, no matter how Marx kept from

. . tryi~g~give any blueprints for the future,~to develop

a general view of where we're headed for the day after the

conquest of power, the day-71 have rid ourselves of

the birthmarks of capitalis~ new generation can

finally see all its potentiality put an end for once and

for all the division be~ee~ the mental and manual labor •

. - . .

~~:~~····~~~~· \~~z? •/.

.. ·.c· .. :./J~ 'J~ jcro\ ;, ''"'··o.• "';··." '·.·.• _;:d.,_·;·; ,\·.·.· V .' ~/

·.•

. ···;-... ,-

·In Hegelian dialectics, the philooophic . .moment is a . . . . . .

. .. .. : ... -~:~terminant; . . == ::::: .-_, <'

. , , ,~ve~ + 'the person who was 'driven to

.articulate the Idea of that-pMii'BCJ!ffi':t~omeri't wa·s very

nearly unc~~ious as to its depth any its· ramification~

. :if remain.Brt;h~ element that governJhe concretization that

follows the laborious birth lW!b&&Jlh e iiX$ 1111~ that·

poured fo~th in a torrent nevertheless/['lpecifically and · . 'the moment ~ ~y 12 and 20 .......-'

concr.ateJ.y, in ou7 c~se/~£ening ~-is~. The ~. · . . · _ emyatJ.fyJ.ng · tP~{Ir~-~~~~~1j'N· Idea i~ · the Abs. clute as the unity of-

l..,vl\.rw-fl ,.; ..... ;::::. ~. \ . 9- £'""41> gU.~.'~•,.nt, - pmcti~ aO~~.

;:::.::::::= : :0:: -

. .'·"

\.....i;re .were so overWhelmed with the movement fran practice that ~ ~~

we were hardly as enthusiastic or as concrete about the·

moveme~t from theory, if not actually forgetting it.

·.·:_) _therefors wish to. go in~o great detail.about those '·. ~-.--._ . . . . . --, -. -- 2 le!t:ers ~-

. i~ 1953 .a!~y detail, ,!!2!: a: the small coin of concret~. questions,

· but a~versalil,l inherent in -~t~ eo that ·we c1n see

still new in .it th:lt we_ must develop for the book, . . . .. . £.. ... . . .

-1"'5,'.'·:•::;,;:--:; .· :}r:,.:;:~·:·\·~~-.: .. ' . ''· .::~, :*~-, \~~ '~)' '~1i!~¥~;1~;~;:z~;;;i;: ~, .... ,.... ,,.. . ... c.:.~·.cs:::"""-'-'C:.::._,:=.c;;c'~-'-'"-c.:.:C:"""-- .,._._·/:;·::cc,-, .. _."-;: *"f't~~ .:;:c<:.:;,:;~·;;-> ~- _•-;-_·_; ,~·---:~ .. ~~~--"--'-.-

. , __

'..'·

~. ·. EVecyone has heard so much ab6ut:,j953 as thi~.

of breakthrough·()~ the Absolute Idea that you may think:' ··· . .. what else is· there t•Y be said? The· whole point, hot'l'ever;·

·-.about the philosophic point· that became a. philosophic '£a:z..;;

l!llJ&:q: dete~minant, and not just the ground of, 'bu·t becanie

so startlingly new and clear with Marx, that iooking at it

for. this age, specifically ourselves, began to appear i.n

an altogether ·ne<:, way. Here is what I mean:

Heretofore what we stress- when we pointed to 1953

<lS SOUrce·, Was the important point Of 1955. When there WaS

an actual organizational break-up. Then· wimt became clearer.

was that actually, in so far ~i~·-·::he words "Marxist-Humanism''

--·are· concerned, ·we couldn,•.t:··.sa~l 1955 ,. but as in was expressed·· not

··in- writl:en <dorm itl""M&F in· 1957. Now what .is clear is l!:ka:.il:

J!::tx:i::s that· any of the other d<1tes are wrong,· but t,hat ea·ch ·

time it is a specific period that makes one realize that

actually \qhat wasn't clear was what was in the philosophic

moment, and only when the objective and subjective mergeiit . . . · ... ·~

lil!lesxi:txliil!l£ is it "proven". Oh, the source, the grout-Kl~' 're~lly rOOfs T- .

---~-=-~also had a ~Gl!lU But the context in-between, the 10tructure, ,.-~Hh....:K-t'll' _ ·-.. ,~~~-;;...;._,~-... .. -. • -·- . ,_ .. . ,.,_·..-;:, .•

~-..•. ···-·-~··-··· couldn't-.h~ . .gontr<;>iled · without--'the-objective- situation. But -. · • •·· t ~ • -r~· ·-~- ... ;. · "J -~----

. ~ :.-

----~~--- ;,··that;.·- on the other ·hand;·· made it very· clear that we· are·· ... ·:•:_ .. ' . - . ... .•-. - .

. · ...• · · · .. ' back . to focusing on the philosophic momer.t • . --~.

·'.l--1987 All'Ii 'raE IMPERA'.l'lVENESS OF BOTH THE. OBJECTIVE AND

. _;~: St.tB.n:cTIVE URGENCY Now MANIFESTS THAT WHAT i'!AS BE~<N 11-N- tr.i:/' .--· .. ~--;,--,;;,-----·~~-,---.· ... -:-.- - .- '·. ' ... - ,•'~'' -;· - .... -

.. _ '!" ... •

:(. 'i'RClQDiEN ,. .... ,.H ALL • .THESE Y"'..A.RS BY ALL POST-l-lAUX MARXISTS 1 INI~LtJDllit(a

·- ~

tl:~~r;~~~~~[;{;~~.r.aea•:t. :br~~kih9- ·.~i th.i, ·t~~,. : ·~hat(ltJaa•:Sufficient •to dt?, _so. politcally without aoin~r/ -~-·~·\~~~;c;::y;_:·\:'j:,.;·,.J_:·'<_-."'"'-' .:·,."·_'' '·:··_ ._::.,_:··"'.:' <''. -- -_-' .. ', ' - ,-_· ___ :··--~: -:_· . •; ~

:~J;(),.~hi~~~ophic;lly?·.··.1rt4~sn't, it ·b~.cause··~~- actual~y· . . . ha_d ,not. penetr!!ted the dialectic of organization in its ·

.relationship to dialectic~ of philo~ophy though wl!! cer-e . . ~ . .

!!:~ tainly never stopped us :•i~f'ti<16 word "dialectics''? In

. a ~ord.· even whtm we use bsolu) in relationship to

method·and defintely stressed that we do not mean just

. 11. tool or applicat~6n, we did thirik that it

' . was no,t ·just the threshol'il of the Absolute Idea, but

the Absolute Idea as its ultimate as if Absolute Mind

was no more than what Absolute Idea t-1as i.n the Logic and·

. -· Heael didn't need to tell us t!:lat we better not stoP.

there a.nd instead p; ·to Philosophy of Nature and Philos-

: it o:f Mind. · No wonder that. .. . : I When· CLRJ said thllt he look~ +-o Philosophy of

.... ·;. ,. , , _ ·.he concluded that he !JJ:' J/ . · ·:~:/~7~~- 3f•:;ound there nothin :for us. \ m st have felt

. ._dissatiffia'd since that fa where I went,\ nd_ ~D.KDx p~e-. · ~~~~~~~f;,:~~~i~~~ say •- on the _question of hat we called

,,.,_,-,,,dislectios of the party", specifyi~g11ever, that I

!(~_::(:>i'-:/:•i/' ltlar! :~C~an'~ interested either in. the ma5 par(, which the

·: ~!a~s ~Ul l)uild, or iri:nt_hweh.aet~liy{apiep.te··-0p5aT0y, which we

· definitely oppose,· hut ~a:p t1 a small group ..... v j

..:_:''

-:r . . . .

. ~

'

i !

.. '·.

. ·:~ .. ,

l?:!c~~,~-~ :""· ··:t .,/. ....... ,.,.,.,. """'41f' ', ~"-"m~sses:'li'nd -are wft:h' tbam. bu~key olre theoreticiMs and'

·- ·~he:Y al;,sys seem :~·o be arounA\too. so. what is the objec~ 7-\ . tivity .which expbins the~:r pr~sence. as the objectiviity

. ~l•i~ the '?"':taneOuttbur•~\ of the "'"•" In ,

wo~d. I was look1ng f~r·the objectivity of subjectivity.

1\YLO:.<.~

l···.

CLRJ · had ~aid in his Notes _.,. ____ ~:-· .~

Notes' th8.t he had ; ' ' lo_oked into :.

·.:.' ' ·, ·. ::"'_::·-·\(~:·.<_. .. _. to:~a.'icl> t~.otl~ll!ag. · thei..e ·r~r us• (riaturaU:y 1:t,iul.t ··

:· -. '. ~ .. . ,·.-:.: .

.. . o:f' bourgeois soc3,.ety and

.. Mind and found nothing inthere for. us, .

So, whatever· it was tMt was drivil".g me in 1953 to write·, ·.;..:,.•,

those letters of 5/12 and 5/20, it suddenly became the whole

of Hegel's work, beginning, as. always, with what Maxrx said

.·was most important in Ph en., going through the S of L with . -either .

Lenin, but refusing to follow/Lenin in that last para, or

CLRJ ,::·n the fact that he found nothing in Phil. of lrlind, ....

and delving not only into that work, but irtto those last

final syllogisms that nobody, including bourgeois academia, had

seriously tackled the next decade, I was not debating them, .or

what they did or did not do1 in 'this case, my "ignora."lce"

saved me from having to argUe with_them or anybody, but, again

it was Marx who. though he broke off his mss, before l~X . . -the final section of Phil. of Mind, the very sharp digging into

-~pital. esper.ially the general law of capitalist acccmulation -~ . .

. and the new passions and forces, led me to conclude ~udden~y that contradictions in the

the di~fj.ctic of the Party as well -9s of the/A! .itself, resulted

·in my seeing what.! called "the new society,• 1i.e. the-end of

the divisiqn 'between mental end manual.

:~.:~-,.. .

. . . ... ... , ·- -- .. '" 10757·

. ' ._; . ..: '·; . '--·~'! ':

.lation -both of '

· , Not:ebooks.

importance· by· including·

Ma~is ·' ' Jf)

Hul)'.anist Essays· and

,.

i~ we were the only

··~-~

~····~········en· . ... ~. . . . .. IT-:.

· 11\ .l~r ~ · . -

(i)vr . ,, 1. I \ I "--

--· '

---·- ._: __ -_

.1987, !:lhen. a· great deal of ~K. reaearch;Cwas ,ao_p. a~=Jijlll:_;o~~J:?,E'..~~~~?';'{-i}! ··~"'""'·'''~'" ·.·. ·-.

::._ E\lg~ft~:, Mike~ ~eter• · cyrils, kevil:i, sheila; oi~a-·.::·_~ti,_·

the ma!l:Y.ways that spontaneity appeared in the fort!ls

!J:~'-C''··"'';:··•.:c·:·····:.·'•C•··.-0 ·.U~"n~iitr~~'. ~J;i.et~~ CO!'ianitteeS 1 C01l1lllUneS; a,nd SO f',;';.;~h-=-··~•,~_:':C .. '".' :;"'c···'"•"-ccc••c' ~.;-\~i~ .. , . . ·'

not onl; to. say the generalization:~ Yes, the party ~nd the. forms of organization bor~ from spontaneity are opposities; •

. . but they are not absolute opposites •. The cha~ge in the .

.. means that the absolute opposite is philosophy, and that . ' - . .

we have not •et worked out organiatio~ally. Because, •• ~ . . " .. '· ' .. , . , - - ., .... -~-........ Jtilf':7 ....... -:or·-,....-

·;.c· ·. ·. · · · ·).:.~, • fo~(;t;~ke I.a~eko~k .. irh~ ··ca~~ii. comz:;~:i:st~. ~eie ,.c~r:::~.· 3~,; .. . . . . . L~fr . ·: / :·:.+:Y · .. ' : . : :... ,.· }·; .. :\{' ..•• ~ : ~·:?· 'l.''l• ./ t ainly earlier on the seen~ and directly opposed Lenin· in .. . - .. ·-·~-·. :' ; . ;:_ ~>. : .. ~ -·~:~:~:..:.;~·-· . ", ._... ·- ·,' . -- .. ~· - .

·'~ friendly way,iiiii!a:'o~ the question of a· single fom-of org-. .. -::- :. '. ·. '\ . . ·:- .. :·.·: ' . -:'. .. - .· . . . '·' . . . ' ~ ':' ·. ' . . . • ...

anization:,. insistlng·<that when it' comes to production, the ·,,, .. . . ·-: ' . . ,·::·.-:~-~' ; .. '. . ·. . . .. . . ..

people at the poi~?-t of production must maintain thEiir power .

. after the revolution. But, ... did they ever ~jive up .their. along with ·

·party? .Didn't they think_ !!IIJlir·Rosa·Luxemburg, that spontan-:-

iey is ·no':lfubst:i.tute .for the wholeness of internationalism2

·and theory?. On the contrary, they took that for granted.

'

:What not .o~ly' was' not taken for.- granted, but never even

approached ir.; any way whatever, unless one calls "approached" · .. · . ~:

a total rejec·ti_on,. was philosophy. Except, except, eEcept •••

.. : . . ·.:: -~he. ex~~~t.~ of_ course,. refers to Lenin. \~o ~p-~~n~ ...

. ~~~:t:.~~~ !::· t:':.:::.:~f4~~~ ·~6.9-ei: .. ·.to"makinq·his Notes public. 1 -··

. ·-,;.

.· ..

. '

o that movement from· practice. Indeed.. · . . -: rectly reh both .

arose/beca se o the sel£-determina t:ion of the Xdea and . .

. · · .. the. ·.mov- .ant fro'!' practice •. Jatmning up against . eanh' other~ .... ···'"·' .

.::·_

-- ;.·:~--

! .. '

:. i I·

.. ~~ ~_,iy ~t tbj d,;,li'>' _::,;,.":_::: road to a ..:... ubi ty ••. • •

,/Jfone must not j!l:a.txal.'lOO!!iix hem irJJI a. new dualtiy_~:l.nto an old

realitymr l:Jecuase of the similarities of abstract oppos-: collision of .

' .. ·'·!

l-< l·-- . '.

> 9Jkw i., • . :~, (,

··_·.: It'/~-.- · ~~ l- ·-• i

! !

itel!l',c:C)llidlng •. !t is the/cone~ opposites· t:hai:.aeiilluids -, -· ' a -.f'o , •

QJi new Unity. Without that, philosophic moment,-:fthere is

.. . (L 9/1" ~ )V.f& ().}Q)J ~~ .. •. no way to hew out a new path. rrn~ ~~~ ~JJi~~-. ~In the crwe of organization, ·everyBI'Iii Left was gnbbing

a~ some old contradictions, and with them, some old solutions. cn...ent . ~v~r~uw ..

~e mos.t ·1!1~ moment for·~ our problema~~,(~~ ... ... . Creative, new

fact that' ~Pannekoek (and Gorter), with that U:JOJ:Ifi&tm oncept'

of council communism

:~_-·.:;-c_:--·_·_-:- -::-· --.

" 10761

.. -~-- ~·· .. -:-.;..:~- .- --,- ,. . -...

'•·' ;!; .l.'

§!nptrio.:.criticisni, .•as,. ~gainst t.enin; s great new ph:liosophic .... <'; -:.··

··· . .,__ .;;_; breakth&:Ol!gh on the LL, arid as if that self.:_movement. of .. . . ' :. ' '·-~·--. "· .

ideas .and of people was. a "betrayal" of .the. class ll::ruggle ~ . . •·

And to this day, _that .is what the counciLIZ!!Ui!illi communis.ts.· -c. >• ... _.·..-~ ;~c.cc' ··: ••~·· , "·•"'."-'•'•-":c::i

'are swearing by, (Lenin as Philosopher ) •

. ~1&tenin, too, never raised philosophy directly in r.e~ llltionship to organization. It was at most, a ph.rase like

the famous *KH~xiRfamgws9~ reference in the Trade Union

Debate, ~here na brin~S in~ in a gen~ra~- wa~ Only, dialectic~

and eclectism. (See P, 65 of Vol. IX Selected wo:dt!i, on"·

trying to say " have been busy :lc¥X:i:Hrp:~ that

whereas it was correct for Lanin not to ·touch the question

of the party when there was thil great phenomenon o£ Soviets, . ~~ .

"we" must no longer avoid the question of party. Whereupon,

they end up just 'with two more reasons for being_i.r!.._favor. ·

of th_N" .... ~ .. ~.~~~ (~ @u.j . 'v(Yvtiu-u . ~ . , ~· & • ,;.k ·.

~~~\,. . ?1:~~:~~ s_~ngle word, ·we~ must qo into these untrodden

paths. We must not, I. repeat must not, look for a crutch·

·. ~c just ~~~s~~ a' ·~ e is u~inc;r the ':ord "dmocrac-.f" . '• ·. . .•...

·to mean more ~han ~n~ par ~d a Mao~spousing at .one ,1?

and .the same time, "bo rd thQ adquaf:i':ers" an? "the. Party')/

( remiins 'th3 vangu ___ ard .. 0 -1-i __ ;xs-;;t~ r. /"""". -:1. . .· . .• . . .. I ___.- r ~ 10762'

.: ' '

' '·1:' .;··.·

•',

.. ' .. ;' ~ .

. . ~Q1iiQLUSiON _ ......

:txxzxxkBxk:l:sxllllx:icex~i~~, ~~ · .· , Since Marx himself, laid ~ground!\ and that . :::-emem-

ber is 1.12 yea~ ~ other wor~s. the 1.,.hole of post-Marx ..

Narxism begim~i~g '"'ith Engles has not built on that I!Jii!l

:fground. And Engels, you must remember, did fight hard to

·if in a ~~moderated" form, and ?iUra: yet assented t·o ·the estab-

lishment of _the 2nd International. And the GSD, xld:Ek had.

been forced to publish it, ~ut only as a ... contribution to

the discussion'~, not as ground for organization.

Lenin did return to Marx's roots in ~egel, and did

see that the CGP had really never been concretized as the

sn~shing of the ~k bourgeois state, z~xxkax without which

·you cou.ld· not ha•;e a revolution. In a word he certainly

~<rorked out the dialectics of revolution,- and made it be .

in Ru2sia. But, but, but-- he ·too didn't ~ouch the qustion

of the party. On the contra~y, ·it didn't. even go as far

as his o~m ~~:xix varied critiques_ of What is to be Done? once

the Bolsheviks gained power.

With P~WLKM; especially Chap. 11, we alone showed had . --. "

that Marx !li!!Jili created the philosophic ground for organi-

ziltion. But' we need not only ground but a roo£. And we :,:··>

,;).h~ve ·'au these 112 yearsc of void on organization and philos-._ '.,. . - - . . ' ·--

·"''" .·•. ' : •. ,',: ·.;._ '_o. ~.:·; .

.. is no time in a nuclear age. to put it off for

222

' · ~n~ther . day •

__ ,.,

' 19B8 is the y~ar of the book and not as in 1980

·· . · 1-1·· · . · t. post-l'l.a_ rx Ma:x:i:s: Marxists, but th_ e 11 just as .cha engf3. o

,•_,

": ·'

actual presentatio~ of. the diale~~itJs -~·f.: philosophy a,nd

. the J:look as one, and for tha~ it n~~-gs a whole organiZation,

;;"•'''"'"""''c~o·~;<.;;;,·-·~;-.,.+~' :Just.th.io ·author. The whole< .. does not mean··· . -.... ---- -----·· ~-- _.,_,_.,......_ --..-,..._ .

. -. ~ - ' . ,• '

_--~-­

·. ~~.;;~· real point is .the meaning that .this is not . a 'question.

of the"author" but the whole orgimization -- I want to

-stress the word, "the whole", not in the sense that each

- . . ~context of / one is going to write a chapter, but rather. ~hal:7'eC£~1J!!I" person'S activity. 1\ __.Wiii'i t,g ,H l l'>lmJWJii:tmnlllft81Hl IL( and special point

.of concentration·-- be it labor, w~, youth, Black, etc.

~.!:ill be inseparable from the ~ ~f that ·activity,

··a h · ~ h h .. b · i h an 1: a~:pnea~, w et er of an o )ect ve event or t e

'"-----" . . ' 1-~---subjective activity, will be projected to ef:i&u , ·;a- f. €~;,

' .. · . • ~~i~l~l ..

~~,i~Ma~t~'f ~ 'O!.ti~~ /ojl ~ 8-ol ~ 1 ~ ~--· ··· .'11:.~1£!1 /P~--- ..... ~.

',···

, .• ,.., ·- -- :-+ . -

..

' ·-~

._,-., ·,_..,,

The philosophic·.nucleaus, the attempt to become "prac•

tieing dialectic;;ianS"IW w • , did have a good beginnin~-­Bu.lz ·a..,.,iUMi&IMI!RR iloo,i-- · .. ··· .

~~.II in the 1980s e 1wL ~il:alil!lll~""'YIRIIIIII'WcXi:A::r~m"$3~ ~~·c,~ .. _ ., ···~·"''" ,,,,.,,;, ... ~·:.;,o,if:~ - . - . -.;: -.. :· .. · .:: :..:·· ·:- __ ·.:·

·i;,..~~d'k:;:o;;:~ls!····lllilh~;·:l!lll.!i;~l5ilaii'Si'iitliitti:lls~x:1kdl!lnilil:j'i::lclillik-QiSfHi~~llloiiu!ul!lclmziiililia:iillliil.etet.., But the test is very

different no•11, .not because that is not what we need. vle ...

•·certainly do. But because the type of rieed involves first

'the ~~hole organization which th~s year has been sc preoc-

. ,-- .. cupied with making a success of the bi-weekly .that the

. q If organizational growth from which it was supposed to

be inseparable was very much separated; it suffered that ·~ ~ot put~e - · tb~.~u.s.e) what w.ir )!'IJ muc11 on the back burner, and ..

; x;::: ~7 . . /----back again to .only me writing it, was~hilosophy.

• ·r want to repeat, because philosophy had not permeated . ..--.

.the paper,,. • 'ila :'I naa ;au'rr•·t '¥ therefore; it didn't

permeate the organization.

•rherefore, I would very strongly suggest that the Plenum

coilsider that beginning:dn Jan. 1988, we become. a monthly

12-page.paper in a very new way where the bock,-- the·Dial-

· .. -

-... - ~-; . ~-.

· ...... •·L~ .

ectics. ,of Pniio~ophy ~and Organiiation..::.:..·•t.;e<Jo;iiies: t:lile_''dtoi;~i.;fi:.i·(s;;(~'·0;'f?i;~)~~~~

ant fOrC~ llOt o.nly in e~say-article~, bUt;~ in every, .. c:'CJLV:L'C'>.r.;,::. . . " . .. '·"''""'' .. . . . . . . . \, . : : . . . :: :;, ··--" -:-~:" .. --:.-~ . :.

we und~rtake, especially in discussions with. subscriber~/ .-,.;---

with not-yet.;;MHists I not . ·. _iC -- - :._ ,.~ .. _-_, . _

just as the recording of tb.!l eve~nts · , ..•... ···~·

and their experiences; but the meaning c:lf those eve'~ts and ··~

eXJ;leriemces and~airectio~ in a global con,text~'Tnat is

what we. ~lill have to project when."l.E;l have converstations

· with ·shbsc~ibei:s. That is what has been missin<:J . •, ..

the whol.E!

. ·~e.~~ conc~t. of "post~Marx Marxism as a· pejorative,; __ it ,·.·.·.·.·•-·<-· . ·. ~Wl~- ·.. . .· .. juat l~id t~i~re in tlta~ · ·· ·' ··

To assure that such Gs;-tht; essay-a;r:ticles woutd be

' forthcoming, we ought i!!!!:'·iiJ s n 1 e · •,. to suggest or have

people ~ volunteer in Sept .. at the Plenum, on what they ..

would do for the issues beginning in Janu ary 1988 •• I have

had a chance to speak to some ..

on this already. li![ By r~ising

it this early, it means I not only want to he~r from you

today,· but we will continue the discussion at the next REB; ----~::.~-

~lhen I will· bring in a d:r;:aft of the Plenum Call. -And once

the Call is out, then the full Plenum discussion is open

. to all.

.,

··--- '. •',. 1076_6: . . .

~\>}"<o.'-'~"'''~·-"··~·'"':"'":"~'". ,,.,~--- .... "· ....... -. :,. . -· .··'· "' . '

(.·

on the Absolute -­

mo~em~nt trompraetic~ as well as. . '

cif_M&:F~ M 1t didn't 'stop there,

state-capitalism_and went beyond _

oocms. · that. followed was a futher c . and

of those 1953 letters, so as new and exciting :as. . - - . -.

the movement frvm·· ~theory,-:·

Trotsky, ·Mao

other claima."'lts of new~ be,it

a movement of practice tha.t· -·. .. ... . ·.:.:coc;c'.:.~.·o.c"o:o·

the new forc.es and passionsseeme?

theory. RLWLKM was. again trying to tower above the mc~e,ment

to stick ·to a st~ll nel!l'illr l'oJ~ce, and, of course, Marx's newly

uncovered EN. And was confronted with and issued

·.a challenge. to MU~fJ-J!tlJ~gr.i~ includ.L;g the one (RL) who.·-

.did appreciate masses, but still l~ME{

!B~~UIJ party precisely because

she .philosophy, revolutionary_

~e:ma~n~ng aimaterialist economist

who refused -into philosophy.

Utx criticized

thal"l · "'"'+'calling it philosophy!li!litfter the ...... u ... enga was issued?·

upon the book on ol."ganiz~tion, again,· the

}U';rul;~l.§, practice, practice, in this case the nai~ took

our ve-r.y highest .. moment of '""·'""''"-~"'"' th!L

.. -..&.· of n Biweekly, we became careless abo_ut boich or1ga1t11~t

j>hilcsophy. That's what has been at the root as well

with; nearly solely with, the Biweekly. to the

.. _ point or~ f(¥i ~~!;;~~/- tJe41Jd/Wf . j

§l.i..;,_.,,,,.J-,.,_0·_ •. 7_~"~'1.::'" ~~ ~ ~~~~lv~ftc 11/0!n~f.~,:.·'

<.:. · .. , .· '--- . .::- , ..

,,.;,)':(.".~ ~~~;.:;.!.."--':;

11111::!:~(1~-s~~~: ~~~~;;~~~,~j~~{';~~ rn~~rt:~ \ ~~~£\ ~t JJ,~~J~