RedMarx

A Forum
It is currently Sat Jun 24, 2017 3:35 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]



Welcome


Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 29 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Russian revolution was predicted
PostPosted: Fri Mar 22, 2013 6:22 pm 
Offline
Comrade
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2012 6:10 pm
Posts: 416
Has thanked: 26 time
Have thanks: 31 time
If Stalinism in 7 decades failed to produce any quote that proves that Kautsky argued that Germany was engaged in a defensive war, I don't have hope that you are able to. It's sad really, there exist articles from Kautsky on his position at outbreak of the war, but nobody can be bothered (it's just the need to bash him that I find petty, and believe me, I did it too, but I think it's really just resentment). After the war Kautsky is known for his book documenting that Germany was the aggressor.

In 1909 (Road to power) he also predicted that the world war would be sparked in the Balkans. I don't know how he missed "contest for power by actual organizations of the working class", unless you believe Kautsky had some super-power influence on the working class so that it would rise up if only he snapped his finger.


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
 
 
 Post subject: Re: Russian revolution was predicted
PostPosted: Fri Mar 22, 2013 7:11 pm 
Offline
Comrade
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2011 2:55 pm
Posts: 1315
Has thanked: 398 time
Have thanks: 938 time
Please, just read this bit of equivocating nonsense from your pope:

http://www.marxists.org/archive/kautsky/1914/10/peace.htm

Quote:
The independence of peoples – that is, democracy – lies in the direction of historic development. This democracy was represented a hundred years ago principally by the bourgeoisie and Liberalism. To-day it is represented by the proletariat and Social-Democracy, in each case a growing, developing class.

States Based on Nations

Democracy can only find its best expression in a State which consists of one nation, speaking one language. Modern production brings the people ever into closer touch with each other. The more the inner divisions fall away, the more all the members of the State speak the same language, the more intensively can economic, intellectual, and political life proceed. And within this method of production is arising the co-operation of the lower classes intellectual and political life, which means additional strength to every nation. In a national State both these tendencies combine and strengthen one another. In a State of various nationalities they come into hostile collision with each other, and have a paralysing effect on the economic and political process, all the stronger as development progresses.

It would therefore be a sad backward step if any of the great national States which are at war were to use a victory in order to annex foreign territory, and thus become a nationality State instead of a national State. That would be a great misfortune, not only for the defeated, but for the victors. Such action would also be an injury to the independence of nations, and each of the nations involved have sworn that they only wanted to protect their own independence and integrity.


The whining, pleading tone gets even more ridiculous:


Quote:
In this compulsory disarmament of the defeated, it must be our business as Social-Democrats to protest against any humiliating degrading forms that it may assume. But the thing itself is most earnestly to be desired. Social-Democrats in all countries will support disarmament, and the diminution in the menace from their neighbours’ armament, will give them a firm basis in so doing.

A third point to be considered is that of commercial treaties. The existing treaties will be destroyed through the war, and new ones will be concluded. Under the pressure of war much hitherto unattainable may become attainable. It is possible that the victor may find it in his interest to force free trade, or something approaching it, on the defeated nations. Or several nations may constitute themselves into a Zollverein. This would mean progress if it were not used as a means of drawing free-trade countries into a protected area, which latter must be fought against.


Some pope, some Marxism. Why would Marxists "fight against" or "fight for" any combination of capitalist economies when the task is the abolition of capital. "Free trade" which always/never exists is "progressive" as opposed to "protected areas." And this from the pope of Marxism during a war of capitals with capitals all over the globe?


Here's the corker:

Quote:
It would be premature to speculate now regarding possible displacements of power and their consequences. We cannot “divide the bear’s skin before it is killed” But this much can be said now: In every country the Social-Democracy will certainly be the first Party to demand the conclusion of peace, and will always work in the direction of moderation.

What success we shall meet with depends on conditions which cannot be reckoned with to-day. It is not the people who decide on peace, any more than on war. Still, even absolutist States must reckon with a strongly expressed public opinion.

Among the ruling classes themselves the greatest differences often exist regarding the terms of peace. In cases where the decision is in the balance, consideration for the people may have some weight even where at other times the people are not even consulted.


I'm surprised Kautsky could tear his lips away from capital's *** long enough to sit upright and actually pen this. All Kautsky gives us is a speculative endeavor, conceding, supporting, wishing for capital to maintain itself as the form of social reproduction.

That's some pope, that's some Marxism.

_________________
Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it?
That's what it is to live the life of a slave.


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Russian revolution was predicted
PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2013 9:54 am 
Offline
Comrade
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2012 6:10 pm
Posts: 416
Has thanked: 26 time
Have thanks: 31 time
The first claim I found that he was called "Papst des Marxismus" is in a 1960 memoir by (catholic convert) Gerda Walther. A variation is "Papst der Zweiten Internationale". Discomfort about the notion of orthodox, authentic Marxism is nothing new though. Furthermore. To be a Marxist is to be accused of being an equivocating, hypocritical, ***-kissing reformist supporter for the maintenance of state capitalism at every turn. It didn't faze Kautsky, because it is untrue.


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Russian revolution was predicted
PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2013 10:35 am 
Offline
Comrade
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2011 2:55 pm
Posts: 1315
Has thanked: 398 time
Have thanks: 938 time
Well, that's certainly a substantive answer re the real content to Kautsky's "arguments."

_________________
Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it?
That's what it is to live the life of a slave.


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Russian revolution was predicted
PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2013 11:30 am 
Offline
Comrade
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2012 6:10 pm
Posts: 416
Has thanked: 26 time
Have thanks: 31 time
I don't think it shows that in 1914 he argued that Germany was engaged in a "defensive war". Even Lenin didn't make this accusation. The objection of Lenin, which you hint at, was this:

Quote:
Since the specific political features of imperialism are reaction everywhere and increased national oppression due to the oppression of the financial oligarchy and the elimination of free competition, a petty-bourgeois-democratic opposition to imperialism arose at the beginning of the twentieth century in nearly all imperialist countries. Kautsky not only did not trouble to oppose, was not only unable to oppose this petty-bourgeois reformist opposition, which is really reactionary in its economic basis, but became merged with it in practice, and this is precisely where Kautsky and the broad international Kautskian trend deserted Marxism.


http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/w ... c/ch09.htm

I can post writings of Kautsky after the war where he agrees with Hilferding (as quoted by Lenin beneath) about the stage of finance/monopoly capitalism, if you want, in order to show that the objection falls flat.

Quote:
“It is not the business of the proletariat,” writes Hilferding “to contrast the more progressive capitalist policy with that of the now bygone era of free trade and of hostility towards the state. The reply of the proletariat to the economic policy of finance capital, to imperialism, cannot be free trade, but socialism. The aim of proletarian policy cannot today be the ideal of restoring free competition—which has now become a reactionary ideal—but the complete elimination of competition by the abolition of capitalism.”


But this is a diversion of the point of my thread, which was to show that Kautsky predicted the RR and saw a European civil war, with socialism as the prize.


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Russian revolution was predicted
PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2013 4:04 pm 
Offline
Comrade
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2011 2:55 pm
Posts: 1315
Has thanked: 398 time
Have thanks: 938 time
How can the objection fall flat? I quoted Kautsky's own words, not Lenin's not Hilferding's, not Kautsky agreeing with Hilferding. Deal with Kautsky's words in Kautsky's writing that you provided to start this thread. What's he saying in that article? What is the underlying basis for his argument? Clearly, that the rule of capital be preserved-- mitigated, subjected to "public opinion" whatever-- but it's all about the continued rule of capital.

_________________
Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it?
That's what it is to live the life of a slave.


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Russian revolution was predicted
PostPosted: Sun Mar 24, 2013 6:43 am 
Offline
Comrade
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2012 6:10 pm
Posts: 416
Has thanked: 26 time
Have thanks: 31 time
The writing of Kautsky that I provided in the opening post (in a spoiler) is the concluding part of a 1915/16 essay and has so far been ignored.

You want me to respond to a summary of another Kautsky article, where he assumes that the rule of capital will be preserved (not that it must), and which was the actual outcome. He says peace conditions of free trade would be progressive, would be reasonable, but as you also note in your blog, that is not what the capitalist class seems to be (Versailles treaty). So when you write that;

The ECB could probably provide the entire 16 billion from the profits generated by its purchases, and preferential treatment of its purchases of the very sovereign debt of Italy, Spain, Portugal and of Greece, the general devaluation of which put Cyprus between Schäuble's anvil and Lagarde's hammer.

I don't think your readers will think that you have become an ECB adviser.


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Russian revolution was predicted
PostPosted: Sun Mar 24, 2013 7:30 am 
Offline
Comrade
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2012 6:10 pm
Posts: 416
Has thanked: 26 time
Have thanks: 31 time
I should say I'm not trying to follow Louis Proyect's effort to promote Peter Camejo's 'Kautskian' road. But at the same time I'm also going further than CPGB or DieNeueZeit in defending Kautsky (whom I think they still rather arbitrarily reject at a certain point, be it 1909 or 1914).


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Russian revolution was predicted
PostPosted: Sun Mar 24, 2013 10:29 am 
Offline
Comrade
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2011 2:55 pm
Posts: 1315
Has thanked: 398 time
Have thanks: 938 time
Noa wrote:
The writing of Kautsky that I provided in the opening post (in a spoiler) is the concluding part of a 1915/16 essay and has so far been ignored.

You want me to respond to a summary of another Kautsky article, where he assumes that the rule of capital will be preserved (not that it must), and which was the actual outcome. He says peace conditions of free trade would be progressive, would be reasonable, but as you also note in your blog, that is not what the capitalist class seems to be (Versailles treaty). So when you write that;

The ECB could probably provide the entire 16 billion from the profits generated by its purchases, and preferential treatment of its purchases of the very sovereign debt of Italy, Spain, Portugal and of Greece, the general devaluation of which put Cyprus between Schäuble's anvil and Lagarde's hammer.

I don't think your readers will think that you have become an ECB adviser.



You can read the whole article and decide for yourself. Re me and the ECB, what I don't say is that if the ECB did provide the money, that would be progressive. I don't say that "socialists" should be in the forefront of arguing for "moderation" in the troika's policies towards Cyprus.

What I do say is that the very irrationality of the troikia's "regressiveness" is essential to capital's "progress." That's a bit more than a bit different from what Kautsky is arguing.

_________________
Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it?
That's what it is to live the life of a slave.


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Russian revolution was predicted
PostPosted: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:01 pm 
Offline
Comrade
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2012 6:10 pm
Posts: 416
Has thanked: 26 time
Have thanks: 31 time
Kautsky's work 'Die Vereinigten Staaten Mitteleuropas' (http://library.fes.de/library/netzquell ... danke.html), the excerpt from which I translated in the OP, is actually arguing against the very idea as advanced by Friedrich Naumann of the European union. Kautsky criticized it as a geo-political project against Russia and Britain (which the present Cyprus case kind of illustrates).

In the article you bring up, about peace conditions, he says "it is not the people who decide on peace", but that even authoritarian states "must reckon with a strongly expressed public opinion". It's just a summary which appeared in Justice of an article by Kautsky, but probably by "strongly expressed public opinion" Kautsky meant at least protests. Now take France as an authoritarian victor after the war. Probably in parliament some social-democrat representatives "strongly expressed" their opinion against the imposed peace conditions on Germany, but I doubt if majority of French workers protested in the street against them. So Kautsky was even being too optimistic. Calling for revolution is very good though, I agree.


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 29 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Donate Now
Donate Now



Hosted by © 2017 FreeForums.org | Create a free forum | Powered by phpBB
About FreeForums | Legal | Advertise Here | Investors | Contact FreeForums.org
Report Violation

Design By Poker Bandits  

suspicion-preferred