Yehuda Stern

The "Basic Principles" draft borrows from, in order, the Gotha Programme, the Communist Manifesto, the Erfurt Programme of the SPD, The Class Struggle (Erfurt Programme), and Lenin's material for the preparation of the programme of the RSDLP.

Basic Principles

Once more, human labour – be it manual or mental – and its technological, labour-saving equivalent are the only non-natural sources of value production. The written history of all societies, up to and including the present, is primarily one of open and hidden class struggles over the exploitation of these non-natural sources of value production. The modern bourgeois-capitalist society has not abolished class antagonisms, but has instead established in place of the old ones both new conditions of oppression – primarily the various forms of wage labour – and new forms of class struggle, a concept which can no longer be taken for granted.

Nevertheless, without the technological, economic, political, and other developments associated with this society, the realistic possibility of abolishing the exploitation of human labour through, among other measures, the institution of full worker ownership and control over the economy, could not have come about.

This socially revolutionary transformation, along with socially revolutionary transformations aimed at abolishing non-class oppression, cannot be brought about by any of the following: private philanthropists amongst the bourgeoisie and petit-bourgeoisie; social engineers amongst the coordinators; legislators and administrators operating within the framework of the bourgeois-capitalist state, especially those from the aforementioned classes; so-called “vanguardists” and other conspirators who do not rely on a highly class-conscious working class; and mere spontaneous development, including social evolution. This necessarily transnational emancipation of the working class, which has nothing to lose but its chains, can only be brought about by a highly class-conscious and organized working class itself, capturing full political power in accordance with the slogan “WORKERS OF THE WORLD, UNITE!”

Class-Strugglist Social Labour (“the Social-Labourists”) disdains to conceal its view and its task regarding the above versus barbarism, the common ruin of the contending classes: Its task is to shape the struggles of the working class into a class-conscious, unified whole, thereby making that class struggle of the working class aware of its historic aim and capable of choosing the best means to attain this aim, ultimately in the form of the simultaneously transnational, social-revolutionary, class-strugglist, and working-class-only “party” of at least the vast majority of the entire working class.



So much for working with yellow reformists, huh?

"You just have to accept that some people have a completely electoralist / parlimentarist mode of thinking and that for them, whoever doesn't vote labor or Sinn Fein or whatever group they admire at the moment is a sectarian."

If only you appreciated my contempt for parliamentarianism more (as well as my advocacy of participatory-to-direct democracy)...

If I were such a Kautskyite:

http://www.revleft.com/vb/karl-kauts...378/index.html

Hello, Yehuda: Thank you for sending me the documents. I am reading through them slowly; I am about half-way through, and the positions sound all right to me.

The Fraccion Trotskista, which I support, has published the following article, "60 years of occupation and genocide: The founding of the State of Israel," on its website, <http://www.ft-ci.org/article.php3?id_article=1292> I would be interested to hear your opinion of it.

With socialist greetings,
sixdollarchampagne/Yosef M

Hey, Yehuda: I forgot to give you my e-mail. It is [email protected]

Would you know: Is anyone into Yiddish here?

With socialist greetings,
Yosef M/sixdollarchampagne

Hello, Yehuda: Thanks for sending me the webpage. I am afraid the only Hebrew I am conversant with is in Tanakh and the Reform siddur. But I have a dictionary. I was interested that one of the articles was about the Grantists, since I used to be a Grantist and broke with their tendency over the question of their Chávez-worship. I will read the English articles on the ISL page with interest.

Thanks again,
Yosef M/ sixdollarchampagne

Hello, Yehuda: How are you? Could you please let me know the website for your group the ISL. I was unable to find it on broadleft.com

I am for a Palestinian workers' state, and I am a critic of Chávez.

With socialist greetings,
sixdollarchampagne/Yosef M

I think military fronts generally translate to popular fronts - you cannot stop shooting each other without some sort of political accord. There is a reason why the Kuomitang shot down workers in Shanghai and Mao was praising it. Same with the Spanish popular front, the anti-fascist front - same old class collaboration that always ends with real communists up against the wall.

I disagree with Lenin on national self-determination, and therefore disagree with you on the question of anti-imperialism. Let's try another hypothesis. Suppose american bombs fall on mexican territory and I get my ass drafted (although that would never happen because I am flat feeted and near sighted). I somehow manage to desert the army because I don't want to turn into cannon fodder of my bosses. Am I doing wrong for not confronting the "imperialist menace"?

You said once "socialists" that back capitalist candidates are not really socialists because they don't have any confidence on the working class. Can't we say the same about people who support workers dying for the interests of their national bosses - all in the name of lesser evilism?

Please drop your sectarian cheap shots against Marmot, "Grantists," etc. [You sound like the Trotskyist equivalent of 3A CCCP) Given my "Social Proletocracy" article, I did say that even Lenin's Russia was state-capitalist.