Discussion Bulletin : September-October 2001

          DB109 begins with K. Mulenga's take on what has become our longest-running debate. He makes some statements I question: Was the Critique of the Gotha Program an "unfinished text," and secondly the IWW is definitely not Leninist. His statement about De Leon's advocacy of "market socialism" demonstrates the unfortunate consequences of the De Leonist Society of Canada's introduction of this term-used to describe the Cuban and Chinese economies--into the debate Also, unless I am misreading the article, Mulenga has adopted the basic idea of the DLSC's market socialism as necessary for the "first stage" of socialism.

          Publication of Kevin Glover's letter was delayed. Joshua Freeze's letter, to which Kevin refers, was published in DB106. I agree with Glover about the IWW's Marxism and anarchism. Working class Marxists-as opposed to professional and academic Marxists-are people who agree with Marxism's two basic points: that our class are robbed at the point of production and that history tells us that this system too will come to an end, something I believe most Wobblies woulld agree with. The only thing that is anarchist about the IWW is that for most of the past 90 years it has been run largely by people who choose to regard themselves as anarchists and occasionally use terms like sabotage and direct action.

          As usual Robert Zani adds interest to the mix, this time in respect to the Hutterites, the death penalty (including his own part in a recent book), and Chiapas. Laurens Otter's version of the history of the Socialist Party of Great Britain in DB108 raised some hackles among readers eager to protect the reputation of the SPGB from the reproach of a DeLeonist taint. Actually the plan agreed on in 1901 or 02 by the Scottish and London dissidents for leaving the reformist Social Democratic Federation suggests a more than casual connection between the SPGB and what became the British SLP. In the first of these letters Robin Cox writes to set readers straight on his contact with Otter, referred to in Otter's letter. Adam Buick attributes Otter's version of history to hallucinogenic mushrooms, and Richard Lloyd disproves Otter with detailed quotations from SPGB sources. (He also notes what may be a questionable quotation De Leon attributes to Marx. Anyone with info on this, please let me know.) The DLSC then returns to the defense of labor time vouchers and what I consider a most unfortunate name for an economy using the LTV system: "market socialism." And I comment.

          Henri Simon, editor of the French councilist journal Echanges, confirms the information about German working class resistance to Hitler in John Spritzler's DB 106/107 article. He also adds information about Tim Mason's investigations and writings on the subject as well as facts based on his own contacts with French veterans of the Nazi slave labor camps.

          Next come three short letters. Neil Fettes critiques my review of Red & Black and the Glaberman interview. And I reply, defending myself as best I can. Speaking mainly from personal experience, Michael Stec discusses the problem of raising class consciousness - and I reply. SRP's letter in support of the proposed Manifesto for an Imagine International sees it as a less ecumenical organization than some of us might hope for. I comment on his letter and take this opportunity to wish him and the SPGB well for their 100th birthday celebration in 2004.

          Next I attempt to deal with Internationalism's further confusions about De Leonism and the Socialist Labor Party. This renewed effort was made necessary by Internationalism's publication of another installment in which they again "come to grips" with De Leonism with all that implies in terms of confusion.

          The title of Wildcat's leaflet on "leftism" illustrates the difficulties inherent in trying to find language that will differentiate "our political sector" from the reformist territory held by social democrats and most of Lenin's vanguardist descendants. Published in the early eighties, it does an excellent job of describing the mischief done by capitalism's left wing.

          Written last year after the "Battle of Seattle," the Bad Press's critique of anarchist participation is less concerned about the Black Bloc's violence than about the implicit message being sent by anarchist demonstrators: that along with the other marchers they are calling on government to take measures to rein in the corporations, hardly an anarchist demand. As usual we end with some notes, announcements, and short reviews.

Finances

The past two months have seen a significant improvement in the DB's financial health. There may be something to the idea that the DB's income moves counter to the economy. The DB's nearly five-fold increase has come while the stock market has fallen from 11,000 last June and unemployment -here in West Michigan at least--has risen two percent.

Contributions: Anne Boone $14; Ken Smith $5; Frank Girard $22; Joe Tupper $20 for the abolition of capitalism; Jim Davis $2; De Leonist Society of Canada $20; Charles Batemen $5; Harriet Machado $7; Kevin O'Brien $10. Total $105. Thank you, comrades.

BALANCE June 21, 2001
$ 155.14

RECEIPTS
 Contributions $ 105.00
 Subs and Sales 136.00
 Total $ 241.00

DISBURSEMENTS
 Postage $ 130.00
 Bank Charges 18.00
 Printing 36.29
 Postage Due .60
 Total $ 184.89

BALANCE August 25, 2001
 $211.25

Fraternally submitted,
Frank Girard