In the famous battle of the vistula river less

This supposedly preserved an achievement of the October Revolution: the abolition of private property. But the character of society is not decided by the forms of property but by the relations of exploitation –or the relations of non-exploitation, in a classless society–. In the 1930s, when the true dimensions of this counter-revolution and the terrible quagmires and impasseshistorical events to which it was leading on the social, economic, political and cultural planes, such an error was understandable. But over time she ceased to be. Why then did my current, as did many other currents of the western radical left, cling, against all odds of history, to a completely anachronistic thesis? It seems to me that the reasons were essentially two.

The first was quite obvious: the alienation of this left in the face of realities and lived stories that weigh on the conscience of those who experience them and make social theories or theories of history tend to Email Lists Database adapt to them. The Western Left did not „live“ in Eastern Europe. It seems like a banality, but the banal does not make itself evident. The second reason was linked, apparently, with the sedimented tendencies of any organization that make it secret conservative ideologies and, among others, reproduce certain anachronistic visions of the world.

It can even turn them into harmful founding or identity myths of the organization. Anyway, the myth of the ussr“non-imperialist” was so unshakeable that one had to keep quiet in front of him, because if there was talk within this left about Russian imperialism, whoever did so risked being treated as a weirdo and politically alien or even marginalized. The denial of Russian imperialism terribly affected, for 80 years, the perception of contemporary world history. It did so to the point that the Western radical left denied that this imperialism had resurfaced, already on a capitalist basis, when in 2014 Moscow began to reconquer Ukraine.