Die Neue Zeit

1. I doubt you have anything to teach about Israeli history.
2. I fail to see how your quip about Hizb Allah is relevant or interesting.
3. My opinion of Hizb Allah is that it is a reactionary organization, willing to sell out its supporters to the pro-Western government, and that Marxists in Lebanon must build a revolutionary alternative to it. That, however, does not change the fact that it is the duty of revolutionaries to advocate for its victory when attacked by Israeli imperialism.

Ask Q. He knows what I mean. But he's worse however. Apparently I would like to urge the CWI to adopt Trotsky's programme of 1938 (intact) while Q wants us to adopt a Maximum Programme.

what are your thoughts on the NPA? Has the CPGB-PCC analyzed it at all?

I invite a critique of this http://theactivist.org/blog/the-vult...y-of-socialism I think its too hard on the Greek anarchists, but that wasn't the primary point.

Understanding strategy is important and I think we both are right on the major issues, but what of the questions of hegemony and consciousness--- of achieving praxis. Certainly we can do our best as nascent intellectuals to defend the principles of Marxists and the strategy of the revolutionary center, but these great debates occurred during a massive surge in the workers' movement, not a retreat.

I see Mike "Comrade" Macnair claims in his own way that The Road to Power is key to understanding (the strategy of) the Kautskyan center and maybe even the CPGB. I read the book, but I never fully understood its strategic implications. Do you know anything that I should read to fully appreciate this work (besides revolutionary strategy)?

Since I'm actually looking into the SPD and read some correspondence I think I can give you a partial answer to a fairly old question of yours.

I don't know if Liebknecht ever became a centrist or developed the preconditions for becoming one. He died before the historic birth of the centrist wing within the SPD. What I do know however is that Engels, Kautsky and Bebel didn't see Liebknecht as a consistant theoretician and organizer. Many times they wrote to each other that they refused to support Liebknecht when he took this or that decission (ones he denounced a rather spontanious general strike of miners). Liebknecht was also the one who had it the most difficult to let go the idea of winning over the bourgeoisie towards Marxism (social democracy). When Marx died things went probably worse. I remember Bebel writing that "Liebknecht is more and more becoming [like] a child".

Welcome to the republican socialist group comrade!

Not interested in your nonsense, Jacob.

Help what Jacob?