·'f..t/9yi~·~?;----·-·--.- .. . \"THE SELF-THINKING IDEA" AND THE DIALECTICS OF A EODY OF

L .

~~~3~~~~!.~.;-~ ID~S1 WHAT IS l@l -~~-~ CO~CEPT _P._F.:~fu'_DEJ!~H_IJ'_1:-c:-·. ·· ij, Philosophically, the Obvious is Never to be Taken for. · ··

~~hGr~ .New Sense of Objectivi ty--';H~~ acti~ity i-t;;;J:F,_. . ._,.--~J.r··:r

as pbjective Cgegenstandliche) activitv"--!f' Ground for . . ... · ' : j I . - ~

' ·- ·.' our Age's New Sense of Objectivity and 2 Kinds of Subjectivity, !

. ~What is~ in. the Concept of Leadership• When is Philo- 1-

F~phy arid Philooophor OM,. ••••• Not~ , . . . fl I

Variant of Leader Maximu~ lather it is on is a

·. whole new Conotinent of Thought and of Revolutio~which.

is l!1lY. JPS • s commentar·y onljicenturies of philosophy: 1.~ · •· . . ·.. '1-rJ ~.J.I- \:J pertinent ~,'

Pa_st _and Present/ :·

~,~~~~~t~~~t~Z!~~Y,you .don't accept the obvious at ~2§...-.!!~~!;;;~ ~ . themselves do not think, ,.;~.o.··•.:::·:~>M'

!flil!·,~I•.:-••,rhe.,n yo~·i!t.bo{at the 4dea)and its developnent,

·.':•:;_~'11 ... - it_s· ~~;w_lig';ki~!!;M.~l @iiecifid ~dea came to

~~i~ili;{''!//~~~--~~~tii:1T~ri and . . ~

" ,I I in 184), followed by the weavers•

decldd to be a ~eater stage

~:hat made all the intallectualll laugh at Marx• s r1ra1CJUJ.o:us~_11l1 )])1an1, \ . . .

was. His answer was that as great as it had been, it never

questioned private proprty,

weavers tearing up ~s

0

i ! .

' ---~!

~ 184~-45 are central to the totality of Marx's 'The years -'

Start, ./_r it is then, philosophicallY) ·discovery at the very ~

and that only because we

. the Econ • .:!piiil. ' .

~t&.·J)s•;' .. tUltibgivil'ai:•hilm >:an·· oral. presentation.

to'·wiiat is.· A ure-lcing co:~i~~~~~~~~~~~~~f~~',~~

. ·-·-·---·--

never ends, They decide to challenge the post-Hegelians, t~ LALf1i!)

Left from which they .both came, The German Ideologyf result~;e · central thesis of,Jihich is a cri ti,que of Fepe:r;-bacll_:,P "materialisu;" ~~S·Il.A ~ ~ O'f'v fi-Cp'J ,, I~ Before o~ectly after this, however, Marx, ~in alon!Jwrites

11 The~o critical of Feuerbach that to this day it defines

thtf@iquenes~ of Marx• s[hist~ricay. (dialectici?J(Jiumanis't mat~rial ... M~ ~

ism as against not pnly Feuerbach i:lllt all mecha,nicy.J, m~a~ter al~m1. cU.w ()A ~rP'lk lti~" tgt;t/,tiQ.C.IlUXlft1!J d/~ -Thesis I (not C XI) projects "Human activfty itself objectiv

. ' I !

! ·.

,, , i

~ : I ,

their new program, the Erfurt Progrk'.e;~i:!k/ftJE,;,e0d the ~t c(. of the 2nd International in 1889~ust ~ ~~ Engels said .that Marx said became~ qMari:ismf so the Erfurt .I Program became the model for all "Marxist"parties, It took all '

the way to 1914 and the outbreak of WWI and the betrayal of the

. GSD and .the ind International before ever anyone thougltt of re-. ·•·- .

'.~$~~ to the ~i tigue of the Gotha Program{j!.enin did ~il. c:,' ;.: :~!;: .

. ... , 7;~he~;.h~ y/as wri tin,g State al1d Revolution. • As :P,l'Q:fQund :t~~i;;,~' . ! :. , ' '-' ' ~- - .. - ' ;

~11&/t~!~,:fl~l~4~&!~;y~slr~ was .. when:) t .~ania,:.:t:o . ~aahi~/1: ,the boi.!rgeo7~?'~~~:.c:', .. :· <f• .. '·'·"~·.:,•;;; .. , :,: '

say about Marx• s coJ~ce•'Pt ?J!.:.J~!:~·~jg;"~•

·his hiBtcitical m~terialism --·.··-,_-_,_,. .

%N!f~~:;:;.·:.\ i'; ,J.~~aHSin', but the e_~!E~~~~~~!U~. ~ .. ~~~~ : : ot the Go.tha Program was written when .Marx had just. con~ple'tlta . ' . .

. the French edition o:t' Capital, with all its new categorise

......

• n \,~J

-1-1¥j'Jtt±' decisive French edition

of CAPITAtjVil~ew empiric studies of pre-capitalist societies

· .l1s!:W. new view of what he .had heretofore thought the greatest ~

enemy, Russia, once it also had a group of revolutionaries ..-.

.J~t e.- h< -~<llo p.-o ~~~,,\:'~' 1.. _1

1111111-. the magnificent covering letter (written, inci­

dentally, on his birthday, May 5) and then look at how the Second

written wasa NEVery step of real movement is more important than

. a dozen programmes. If therefore, it was impossible to go beyond '

should have concluded an .,'•

·Jq~~~~~LJ~~? ·-- claimed to have created a new Un1ive~sal~m1

olaimdd the opposite -- i.e, that he just follo~ed

·~ • -• .- ••. • • • ., • f •

~~~~~~~~~g·:•'n··; oon.crete features. Wheth~ VIL did or d~ISJ:i.~t. j~ z~tional form as a Universal(between 1905 . < ·

&_il!l,e•·1nS1.:s'1H!a it was only a question of a very specific · ··

in,l917 he .DJ. establishing a new Univ~:r:'I'Jal -- ~~~~

' ~

I . '

I ,)

~he experienced the greatest revolu'Cion of his time and . c_ ·:;: ~:-- -.::::;~ .. ~· .• ~:f

its cfeation --the. Paris Commune~~hich he concluded that.

it was necessary to go "lower and deeper", a phrase Lenin first

"discovered" in 1914\ In a word, Marx had by ~~ked out his

1hole body of ideas)and it was at that point that he not only

rejected a unity of so-called Marxists and L~alleans but set

a totally oppo_ai:te---foundation- :for organization with his philosop}jy

_of _r__evolution) silence on. th;-~u~ation of organization

in e and Revolution did not, unfortunately, mean

that .he had abandoned his concept o'f!j;arty of "professional revo-

lutionaries: ~ H t ·, n . ~e Bolsheviks

gained power~ the coneept of an elitist party was no longer.

just "RUssia~·~ or m~~lly .,.m.rftrl )X'a:P function~er ff ..•. · r\~~:U~~~~~.~;,~;, ... ,,,,!';~.~ar:Ls It~ined international "r:~tat!JJ:~Jl .'

~~ the-.~JJrd Inter~~:~~j!i}o~~.'.•· j(;,~f::::::7~~'7111fPLw.&,, a' ·~- 1-W- r- • .. :.

;f.To make matters

the question of revolutionary Marxist

·question of ~~!nh!J~

to Ch~pter 11 of RLWLKMo41111• It is no

-~idt estimate of Trotsky as theoretician was made ·.·· .. ·;~

·;~ppendix ·by me to the chapter on .......... .

~hilosopher of Permanent Revolution Creatin~ New

organization~

. '

'16291

:._:::_-___ .. ~:.. ..

illuminated the whole question ,of the illiljlliil •IIi-of philosophic

that for the entire C'the 17th to

I ·~· . ;::"~.-

••·of' philoaoph~o

for the entire

with capi tali em.

~ 19~ k rr~qlfof!!9 ~~~~~~~

. ' ..,..7-'HAT-IS"~.IN LEADERSHIP FOR OUR AGE; THE DIALECTICS

~:'~;;~·Dr _0~ REVO~UTIO~AR~: IDE~S ( ~w~ , ~i_{o~!·difffcult it -i~ -to work out a concept -of·l-~ea-del~SI~~~(, '·'''-''-''-'''-'' 4:.:•/-_ .• !".: .. ;;,, . parii'lil:f\·.lf'rom a philosophy of revolution and concreteeni)UQ~l'l ':-.:··:':!:';'\'- _ .. ·: -~: ·: ~-... :···:· -~::'' ' newer: the que'stions of our be seen clearest in ...... _ .. _.

~d I-have called On The Th ~articipated, __ , '·i:~:'~j ~e i9so ·strike at the same time as we worked out philosophyi ,,':,:••::·:-'it•:,,! ~ turned out to be a long1~1. . . - , : .. •,_'':,·,,_\{;:·-,:;~~·

~}le~tion in that 1f 5 5 W""trail to break- .- _ '\•.:i .• :1.~i}t\'.·,·.:;·~ 1gh~.to "Sdf-Thinkiitg Idea" also re le~dership happened •.. ·_· · t.•' ••• :~:;;;fi!~J;:j ~1 when at one and the' sam;__t_1fn~.4 ~ made a breakth;"ough ~if&r~ v

organization~o~1· And yet, to really see

revolution is it is is that ~ilosophy of

eased J.scoverer'f !$:.1:.N IT' IS THE DISCOV'ERY

~ NEW CONTINENT OF THOUGHT AND REVOLUTION . . - --. -- - . ... ;I'

•

··- .,. -···

-8-

:hat he would be voted down, he postponed the vote,

, in Pittsburgh where I was living and knew nought

tpenings, I left that very night to listen to the

:he opposition. The argumentation brought to my

question 'I had been working on, that. it was Marx•

and Engels, who discovered a whole new continent of

.nd revolution. ~oJ ~ .!f..t, .fpntb. ~ M ?~p'; I stopped right there, it. would have been great.

tely, 'the ~estion for which I was brought

was that J, was right, always right. I jumped to

usion that it was ~s-~ne, no~and J, was

Read the speech(with which I first became re-acquainted' . : .

into 1950·53 for the new pamphlet) to grasp fully

' same time, the or~anization was open, was decentralized,

the paper, and the whole question of relationship of rank

le to leadership, between leaders and ranks, were likewise

Jarated from philosophy,

'. .... '

: !,

I

[

1

' (jljho highpoimt ""'::vo oomo whom wo workod ovt •rov,im

i'• pel:'rnan<~nce" as gl:'ound of org, AS A~ BUT({LOi-~ !:: it appearede categor'EJit was the :;-~thodology_,Q 21!xx.

i: underlining all our activities as well as writings, What we

are still weakest in is that this is not projected to others

so that though, for ex., we use the expression N&L as organizer

for M-H we hardly nractice it quantitatively

tieation is an

in subs, Concre-

.. parab~ theoretical-practical ma"'iJezt- there 1e but one

word 1111 -- i.e. one ~t-- left to express it, And th~ P§~(!§jectiolJGlroje~. IJnderstanding M-1li

1em -.

' telling it to ourselves means nothing. It's only when you know

how to project eo others can understand, and grapple with it so

shown that

·how kt'eat

anybody please tell me whether they have ever witne

whim pens as the lose of an editor,

_and on1Y t1;;f:~ffi!l;~ single issue being skipped but· 1 ,-~ .1i.l1;;;·.?;~~}]1

already having experienced for a year in advrun.otfi U"l:J ·•-'······""'' •••ir.t~lleotual, Lou, practicing writing as

MS:l'X:Ls1~l!lim,anis· . columnist, ~new element of labor

with immigrant labor -- as well as one

-- and all these precisely in the spacjt -·~··· ,[ -.

a.!ll~:j•d to CD, and specifically placed on page- "~'''W!·' one who both had bfoken through on AblsoJLute<Idiai.'ji~~~~·?;;jlj

established that unique relationship of wol~ker

separated theory from

a , trns 6tler . '·.·.·:''.L~I·\., .• ! ·· ·: .·)~'t-r;hr;

-::::====-----:::::--_::::::.

' '

Re~ort qy Raya for Executiv& Session

•

"'!'HE SELF-TiimKING IDEA" AND TilE DIALECTICS OF A :OODY OF REVOLUTIONARY

IDEAS• WHAT IS ~ JN OUR CONCEPT OF LEADERSHlP?

I, Philosophically, the Obvious is'Never to be Taken for Granted

II, Ma~' s Ntnr Sense of Objectivity -l "Human activity itself as

'objective (ue~enstandtiche) activitY:!) the Ground for our Age's

!lew Sense of Objectivity ant! l'wo Kinds of Subjectivity

m, What is ~ 1n our Conce1;>t or Leadership I

When is Philosophy and Ph:t1osopher One -- "One, Not Two";

It is never a var1.ant or "l.eader 1-'.aximum", Rather, it ie on ~ is a w~e and of Revolution, . /

·;;..:.M;olr-h!~lw-<1l!:m·-Paul Sartre 's commentary on three centuries of nhilosopby is pertinent to Ma~ist-Humanism.

~nrt by Raya fftP

Executive Session

"THE SELF-TIIINKWG IDEA" AND TilE DIALECTICS OF A OODY OF REVOLUTIONARY

mBAS1 WHAT IS NIIW. IN OOR 'C~~ ~ERSHJP?

~XI'~~. I, Philosophically, ~ious ~for Granted 5_.~c~.

\fk. ' ~~~w~ (JfiJY:+I-) £1 II, lllrour:'s •NIIIr Sense of Objectivity ~'Human. ~-~~ivity •.. its,~p_.,.•'s'\ ~_t(

• INW'~ ~l"'Tf_/ Q.i1Ji-· objective (ueP.'811standliche) activit. 'i(the Gr~ur Age's

New Sensa of Objectivity anrl l'wo Kinds of Subjectivity •

. In» ~ 1n our Concept of Leadars~ipi-i~· /~ . #) ~ "#e ?7P s-o; I ,e_f7?, . 7" / ~ ~

Philosophy and Ph:llosophlr Che - " a, Not . o" ~ is never .a variant of "l.aader l'.uimum". Rather, it is on

llffli11f.j;!!!!!l!:. is a whole new Continent of Thouldlt and of Revolution,

!o/hich is !!!.\:.Jean-Paul Sartre's oo111111entary on three centuries of philosophy is pertinent to Marxist-Humanism,

I

'

I .... ·I ''.; . . . i . !

.. .,. ·f .;·;;I.

., . ! .. ·I . ·,I.

162~~-j·

"THE SELF-"THINKING IDEA" AND THE DIAI£CTICS OF A ·BODY OF REVOLUTIONARY IDEAS: WHAT IS ~ IN OUR .CONCEPT OF LEADERSHIP.?

I. Philosophically, ·it is wrong to take the obvious for granted . . . .. . II. The new sense of objectivity in our age of state-capitalism, which is·why Marx's semeof Objectivity --·"Human· activity itself as Objective (ge<;fenstandliche) activity" -- has new mea·ning; the i Ground t:or our age·• s new sense of Objectivity and two kinds of subjectivity •. . .

III What is ~ in our concept of Leadership: It is high time· ·to reveal tha·t the. missing link -- philosophy -- is what has kept even the greatest revolution -- Russia, Nov. 1•91 T -- unfinished.

IV Ne~s ·and ·Letters Committees 1 National Elections, Past and Present