I wasn't referring to that at all, comrade. I was referring to the definition of what exactly are the petit-bourgeoisie. Rhetorically, to what extent is the entirety of "capital property" the "means of production"?
Yeah I know.... But comrade, I think you misunderstood my usage of the term "petite bourgeois socolialism". I was reffering to market socialism and rule by cooperatives in the first world, I was in no way saying the petite bourgeois socialism you mention for the third world was obscure or bizzare.
Cool down, comrade. He's not worth over-the-top reactions like those given to me by former board members. Also, you might be interested in joining this group: http://www.revleft.com/vb/group.php?groupid=205 The materials there pertain to one of the e-mail attachments I sent you.
Thanks for the rep, and yes, that is what I meant. I was going to say "We oppose this type of class collaborationism where it isn't a necessity, and would not be in the interest of the proletariat as a class" but I was running short on time, as I was typing it in class
Oh, never mind, the group
Thanks, but What is RevMarx?
Feel free to post new RevMarx discussions.
Revolutionary Social Democracy was the merger of socialism and the worker movement. Both Kautsky and Lenin asserted this.
Why does Kaustky mention the Communism as something he opposed? I read somewhere he reffered to them as Communists, and to real Marxists as Social Democrats. By the way, what did it mean to be a Social democrat for kautsky?
It's Maoism plus independent working-class political organization minus collaboration with the "national" petit-bourgeoisie and comprador petit-bourgeoisie.
