Comments for Platypus

Comment on Splits, regroupments, war, and revolution in Germany, 1914–1920: A conversation with Ben Lewis by Noa Rodman

Noa Rodman — Sun, 13 May 2012 16:26:43 +0000

I’ve not read Z&M in Halle, but for the sake of interest, there is letter by Martov reporting on the conference back to Axelrod dated 17 October 1920 @ http://lib.ru/HISTORY/FELSHTINSKY/martov.txt_with-big-pictures.html#68 (Приехав вчера из Наlle, … copy-paste it in google-translate). Apparently Martov thought he’d scored a victory.

On the inclusion of the democratic republic in the Erfurt programme, I wrote some comments @ http://libcom.org/library/correction-friederich-engels-karl-kautsky

Research here should look for Kautsky’s letter of 9 January 1891 to Engels, apropos the Halle congress of 1890.

I think that the democratic republic wasn’t included, in part because it was such an obvious assumption of the program. In fact it is Engels’s critique itself which is more shaky, at least in its conception of the (origin of the) state according to Macnair (who, btw, unwittingly repeats Kautsky’s critique of Engels on this score, see http://archive.org/details/DieMaterialistischeGeschichtsauffassung ).

Comment on What is the #Occupy movement? by #OccupyMayDay 2012 #Occupy #Christchurch #M1 #OWS #GlobalSpring #GeneralStrike #M1GS #Chch « Rik Tindall blogs

Tue, 08 May 2012 23:58:45 +0000

[...] What is the #Occupy movement? “Occupations should not be regarded as the distinctive or necessary characteristic of any future action.” platypus1917.org 1 March 2012 [...]

Comment on Liberalism and Marx: An interview with Domenico Losurdo by interview with Domenico Losurdo on liberalism and marxism | being-in-exodus

interview with Domenico Losurdo on liberalism and marxism | being-in-exodus — Sun, 06 May 2012 15:44:42 +0000

[...] Platypus. Share this:EmailFacebookTwitterRedditDiggPrintStumbleUponLike this:LikeBe the first to like this [...]

Comment on Liberalism and Marx: An interview with Domenico Losurdo by Liberalism and Marx: An interview with Domenico Losurdo « The Charnel-House

Liberalism and Marx: An interview with Domenico Losurdo « The Charnel-House — Sat, 05 May 2012 20:18:37 +0000

[...] Losurdo, the author, most recently, of Liberalism: A Counter-History (2011). What follows is an edited transcript of their conversation. Full video of the interview can be found [...]

Comment on After Hegel: An interview with Robert Pippin by After Hegel: An interview with Robert Pippin « LibArts London

After Hegel: An interview with Robert Pippin « LibArts London — Tue, 01 May 2012 11:04:56 +0000

[...] Read an edited transcript of the interview… « On July 9, 2011 / In the margin / Leave a [...]

Comment on Learning from the Communist Movement of the 20th century by Grover Furr

Grover Furr — Mon, 30 Apr 2012 14:16:59 +0000

Dear WSwift: Thanks for your post!

To reply to your first point:

> I think criticism was implied in a previous post in which, it
> was claimed, you denied the veracity of famines, purges…

This supposed “criticism” is a straw man. I do not deny that these things occurred, if that is what you mean, and the poster, Marq Dyeth, cites no evidence that I do. Nor is there any mention of them, let alone “denial” of them, in my essay here!

Mr Dyeth’s post is a good example of something I do deplore in my essay: people writing nonsense about Soviet history out of pure ignorance of that history. Mr Rubin is, sadly, not alone in this.

As for your second point:

> you seem at various points to make a thinker’s ‘insignificance’
> a de facto criticism.

I note you use the word “seem”. That shows that you realize yourself that I do not say any such thing.

I don’t ‘criticize” Benjamin at all. As for Trotsky, I said that his concept of “permanent revolution” was an intelligent response to 1905 but proved to be untrue.

Rubin’s essay, like many others in Platypus and elsewhere, reflect an inexcusable ignorance of the history of the communist movement of the 20th century. No wonder it is wrong-headed!

The problem is that many people think they know this history — when they do not know it.

Many people take their so-called “knowledge” from anticommunist and/or Trotskyist works. If that is what you “know” about Soviet history, you are far worse off than if you were indeed entirely ignorant.

Comment on The sport of protest by The Sport of Protest « Petrichor

The Sport of Protest « Petrichor — Thu, 26 Apr 2012 03:55:33 +0000

[...] The Sport of Protest [...]

Comment on Book Review: Susan Buck-Morss’s Hegel, Haiti, and Universal History by Who is Susan Buck-Morss? « :transportgeo:

Who is Susan Buck-Morss? « :transportgeo: — Sat, 21 Apr 2012 17:21:52 +0000

[...] One of her most recent works, Hegel, Haiti and Universal History was reviewed by The Platypus Affiliated Society. [...]

Comment on Learning from the Communist Movement of the 20th century by WSwift

WSwift — Tue, 17 Apr 2012 06:15:41 +0000

Dear Mr. Furr,
You have asked for criticisms. I think criticism was implied in a previous post in which, it was claimed, you denied the veracity of famines, purges, and other authoritarian elements within the USSR under Stalin. To add to this list, you seem at various points to make a thinker’s ‘insignificance’ a de facto criticism. The inverse of this is that a thinker’s perceived significance is automatic legitimation. If this were true, many of the most tawdry bourgeois ideological formulations would be much more legitimate than Marxist critique itself, especially today. You seem to imply this about Benjamin as well as the Frankfurt School, that their thinking ‘had no impact on world politics’ or that it ‘was completely isolated from political struggle’ and is therefore theoretically false or useless.

Comment on Learning from the Communist Movement of the 20th century by Brian Gallagher

Brian Gallagher — Mon, 16 Apr 2012 02:33:30 +0000

This is laudable and well-balanced article. It is most certainly true that the second half of the 20th century saw the greatest victories against imperialism. The armies of Austria and Britain trying to crush the French Revolution was amateur hour compared to the US military in Vietnam. And when it comes to violence there’s no “accounting for inflation” since the human body has remained just as frail. The left, especially in the US, must embrace the victory of the Vietnamese people over imperialism as one of the most significant victories in history. Chomsky, ever the pessimist, claims that Vietnam was a defeat for national liberation because it was a warning about what will happen to any nation that attempts is, i.e. destruction, war, etc. But I believe that Grover Furr’s article here that facts aren’t optimistic or pessimistic, WE are. If we consciously decide to recognize the 20th century as victories (and not in the academic way as “models” necessarily), I believe that we can reinvigorate the left.
I like the Platypus slogan, “The Left is dead; long live the Left!” However, this can very easily be taken for something completely undialectical and, in the worst meaning of the term, “Trotskyist”.