a quick note..December 19 2008 at 10:20 PM
|Ilya Ehrenburg |
Response to dialectics
Dialectics are a method, not a theory. It is anything but undialectical to require some seperation of subjects under the circumstances of a specific question. Dialectically it would be wrong in a short article to cover Hoxha as a leader and the Sino-Albanian split in depth and then tie it in to the position of the British workers movement today. That would be oversimplification and hugely open to criticism. In the bigger picture both Hoxha, and China's role as anti-imperialists are worthy of praise, but neither are immune from criticism, and that is the basis of the dialectical method. The CPGB(ML) support Hoxha for his anti-revisionist work, and also China for its counterpoint to US hegemony, the fact is that these two positions are indeed the tips of their respective iceburgs, and need further, and appropriate discussion. But! an artcle about China today, is not the place to bring up Hoxhas criticisms, and nor is an article about Hoxha a good place to dismiss China. They are of course related, but who would benefit from dismissal, criticism, or confusion of either, the working people of the world or opportunists and anti-communists? The dialectical method requires a very thorough and detailed discussion, but this does indeed lie beyond a short article regarding the 100th anniversary of Hoxha's birth. I do however believe that few parties today are willing to take on these difficult issues, and the fact that most simply focus on simple economism gives great credit to the CPGB(ML) for refusing to take the 'easy way out' of turning a blind eye, or sniping from the sidelines at such attempts.
For those who actually take the time to read the works of Harpal Brar without prejudice it is impossible to dismiss him so flippantly as some do on this forum. But of far greater concern to the 'keyboard warriors and armchair critics' here is that very little of the CPGB(ML) material is actually written by Harpal Brar, those who dismiss the party as him and him alone are sadly wrong. I do not say this to serve an agenda, but rather to present the truth for those of us 'without baggage' from previous affiliations or long standing loyalties.