Discussion Bulletin : July-August 2001

          Like the last issue, DB108 begins with a plan for a unified movement of libertarian socialists. These ideas have a certain attractiveness about them. Who among us wouldn't want to be part of a much larger organization, one with the financial resources and active participants to carry on a higher level of agitation? In fact this is the idea behind the Imagine International proposed by Dan Vogel in DB107. The problem with such ideas, as Red indicates, is the preconceptions and strongly held convictions of the different "persuasions" or "tendencies" among us. For example, I have a lot of trouble with Red's idea that the unified revolutionary movement would enter into a reform struggle to improve working class housing and work toward the abolition of prisons. Both strike me as diversions from the revolutionary objective, and both send a message to our class that' s at odds with revolution: the implication that our problems can be solved within the capitalist system.

          An evidence that a unified libertarian-socialist movement is a bit farther away than some of us would like is the dearth of responses to Dan Vogel's DB107 proposal for an "Imagine International." Laurens Otter writes approvingly of the proposal but immediately raises what is probably the major question: What would be the ideological requirements for a group's inclusion in the I. I.? He goes on to illustrate his point with reference to the requirements for membership in the Socialist Party of Great Britain.

          "Profit Kills" strikes me as a perfect example of the kind of advantage we could get from closer cooperation in our political sector. The essay appeared a couple of years ago in the left-communist journal Internationalist Perspectives. I scanned it immediately for inclusion in the DB, and then set it aside because of more pressing material. But I think it is the sort of thing that could appear in any journal in our political sector. It is well written and persuasive-- Worthy of being formatted and published as a leaflet. The same is true of Adam Buick's "What Is Capitalism?" from the December 2000 Socialist Standard. Buick uses as his point of departure the anti-capitalism we hear voiced in demonstrations at meetings where our masters write agreements for the new global capitalism. Here too we have a potential article for publication in any non-market socialist paper and a leaflet for any group.

          Aufheben continues to be a frustrating journal for the DB. Typical articles run to 20 pages or so making them far too long for inclusion in the DB. Issue #9 is no exception. The two major articles, one on Chiapas (26 pages) and the other Aufheben's contribution to the four-part series "What Was the USSR?" (19 pages) couldn't be included in the DB without crowding out nearly everything else for two or more issues. On the grounds that more readers are likely to be interested in theories about the nature of the USSR than "A Commune in Chiapas? : Mexico and the Zapatista Rebellion" this issue concentrates several pages on the former, printing portions of the introduction and the conclusion.

          Neil Fettes's review of Working for Wages appeared in a shorter version in Z Magazine. The book expresses the authors' conviction, one held by many DB readers, that the class struggle is spontaneous and that our efforts to organize it or to 'educate' workers for it are futile.

          My review of Internationalism's "The Legacy of DeLeonism" raises questions about as many as possible of Internationalism's misconceptions about De Leon and the century-long history of DeLeonism. As usual we end with some notes, announcements, and short reviews.

Finances

I'm beginning to think that the economic health of the DB moves counter to that of the stock market. In April when the stock market appeared to be headed for a crash, DB finances recovered from a low point in January. Today the Dow is above 11,000 and the DB's two-month income is well below $100. But the good news is that we still have a long way to fall before we drop to the red ink levels we were usually in twelve and more years ago.

Contributions: Joe Tupper $20 for the abolition of capitalism. Total $20. Thank you, comrade.

BALANCE April 20, 2001 (per bank statement) $ 266.43

RECEIPTS
Contributions $ 20.00
Subs and Sales 38.00
Total $ 58.00

DISBURSEMENTS
Postage $ 112.00
Bank Charges 18.00
Printing 36.29
Postage Due 3.00
Total $ 169.29

BALANCE June 20, 2001 $ 155.14

Fraternally submitted,
Frank Girard