💾 Archived View for gemini.spam.works › mirrors › textfiles › magazines › ZIGZAG › zigzag13.txt captured on 2022-06-12 at 15:28:14.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
From: pmsc13sg@smucs1.umassd.edu (Stephen Grossman) Subject: ZIG-ZAG 1.3 Message-ID: <C6z60n.ECD@umassd.edu> Organization: UMASS DARTMOUTH, NO. DARTMOUTH, MA. Date: Thu, 13 May 1993 17:02:46 GMT Lines: 346 ================================================================================ ZIG-ZAG 1.3 May 13, 1993 TRACKING THE MARXIST DIALECTICAL STRATEGY OF ADVANCE-RETREAT-ADVANCE OR UNITY-SPLIT-UNITY IN INTERNATIONAL REVOLUTION STEPHEN GROSSMAN WEEKLY? INTERNET -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- talk.politics.soviet, talk.politics.theory, talk.politics.misc, alt.individualism, talk.politics.misc, alt.politics.usa.misc, alt.politics.media, soc.culture.soviet, soc.history, alt.conspiracy, alt.politics.radical-left, alt.activism, alt.activism.d, alt.censorship, alt.politics.usa.republican, alt.news-media, news.future, misc.headlines, alt.society.revolution, alt.society.anarchy, alt.revolution.counter, alt.politics.correct ================================================================================ A leading American news organization praised Johnnetta Cole, anthropologist, president of Spelman College, and Marxist. "...her contacts with...pro-Cuban organizations...member of the national committee of the Venceremos Brigade, a group that sponsored sugar-cane cutting expeditions to Cuba but one the [FBI] maintains is connected to Cuban Intelligence forces....member of the executive board of the U.S. Peace Council [in 1983]....the F.B.I considers its parent organization, the World Peace Council, a Soviet front. Dr Cole said she was never a member of the council, but wrote for the group. ["A Scholar's Convictions...," Week in Review, _NYT_, Jan.10, 1993] ________________________________________________________________________________ The following are examples of dialectics: "...a struggle between a "reformist " President and a "reactionary" Congress...in which the [U.S.] or the West can swing the outcome through a quick infusion of aid or support. however vicious and real it may[!] be, the current congress is likely to be only one of many convulsions of a system in the process of profound and bewildering transformation....a mind-set alien to ...a free market." ["Aid to Russia," _NYT_, Mar.11, 1993, p.1] "...The possibility that Comunists will again dominate Russia and make [dialectical] alliances with nationalists in other [dialectically] former Soviet states, also nuclear, does that make no difference at all in American strategic thinking? And what is American strategic thinking?" [A.M. Rosenthal, "Facing the Risks," Op-Ed, _NYT, Mar.16, 1993] "Georgian [leader Shevardnadze] Asks for Weapons; Warns of War With Russia" [_NYT_, Mar.18, 1993] "Yeltsin, Asking Aid, Talks of Communist Revival" [_NYT_, Mar.17, 1993, p.6] Marxist dialectics guides these revolutionaries to temporarily split their forces and to tell class enemies that aid will help the "good" side against the "bad" side. This theory-driven strategy is not secret but widely publicized in books. Of course, if class enemies are Pragmatists or traditionalists who don't use theory then Marxists are not going to tell them to use a library. "We wanted to deceive you. But you wanted to be deceived." [Chinese Marxist to Western intellectual; quoted by Paul Hollander, _Political Pilgrims_, 1979] "Russian conservatives can't pay for an arms race any more than Russian liberals can. In the past few months, there has been a clear convergence in their positions on defense and foreign policy. Liberals now favor increased sales of sophisticated military equipment to the third world to keep Russian arms manufacturers in business [or to aid other Marxist revolutionaries]. And conservatives say they recognize that the military-industrial complex has to be sharply cut back. A change of government could push this convergence[!] further still." [Stephen Sestanovich, Op-Ed, _NYT, Mar.23, 1993 "[In Russia] power is not something to be shared; a white flag is a sign to attack; compromise is only a lull in the fight[!!!!!]." [Steven Erlanger, "It's a Tradition: Russia's Politics of Fear and Favor," Week in Review, _NYT_, Mar.28, 1993, p.1] "YELTSIN, SURVIVING CLOSE VOTE, CLAIMS DEFEAT OF A...'Communist coup d'etat.'" [_NYT_, Mar.29, 1993, p.1] The _NYT_, with quotes, recognizes the "coup" as a fraud. But they don't identify the standard of evidence by which the earlier "coup" was real, unless, of course, it "ended" communism" and thus permitted Pragmatists to feel comfortable in compromising with mass murderers. "He also shows how Marxism-Leninism had tried to use ethnicity and the principle of national self-determination as tools..." [Stanley Hoffmann, "An Idea...," _NYT Book Rev._, April 4, 1993, p.10] "The Bolsheviks introduced all the forms[!] of democratic rule-a Constitution, the "soviets" or councils, courts of law. But real power remained concentrated in a secretive, arbitrary, and rigidly hierarchical bureaucracy, the Communist Party, which based its claim to rule on the vague [to Pragmatists] premise of historical inevitability." ["No Self-Evident Truths," _NYT_, Mar.13, 1993, p.1] It is recognized that Marxists defrauded class enemies in the past but, Pragmatically, that past is disconnected from the present, where, we are assured, Pragmatists are no longer defrauded by Marxist revolutionary strategists. '...leaders often appear to change everything while making sure that nothing important is changed." [Leslie Gelb, Op-Ed, _NYT_, Apr.22, 1993] "...after months of on-again, of-again talks in which [head Bosnian Serb leader, Karadzic] seemed intent primarily on buying time so his forces could seize more territory." ["Head Bosnia Serb...," _NYT_, May 5, 1993, p. 1] "...it may be that this latest show of sweet reason is a subterfuge. [Serbian leader] Milosevic in Serbia and Karadzic in occupied Bosnia may be playing nice-war-criminal, tough-war-criminal with Lord Vance-Owen, pretending to make peace until the world relaxes." [ William Safire, Op-Ed, _NYT_, May 3, 1993] "There is an old and wise rule of thumb about Arab-Israeli negotiations. If they seem to be getting better, just wait a while and they'll almost always get worse." [Leslies Gelb, Op-Ed, _NYT_, May 6, 1993] "How gullible can we be? Serbia's purpose [in announcing its embargo of war supplies to its ethnic cleansers] is to enable its militia within Bosnia to drive out or kill the Muslim population. To accomplish this without inviting air attacks on Belgrade power plants, Mr. Milosevic must PRETEND TO DISSOCIATE HIS NATION FROM ITS FRONT-LINE FIGHTERS [editor's emphasis]....ELABORATE CHARADE OF A RIFT. [Milosevic] directed his chief Bosnian Serb stooge to buy two weeks of warmaking by signing a meaningless peace agreement; he made a great show of lecturing the Bosnian Serb leadership to ratify it; he posed as being being furious when they stalled some more with a phony referendum....Naturally, the U.N.'s David Owen...buys this NOTION OF A RIFT and all but embraces this war criminal as a new hero....SERBIAN RIFT TRICK...is...aimed at not only delaying the air strikes, but at extending another embargo. [on Serbian Rift, Op-Ed, William Safire, _NYT_, May 10, 1993] After the alleged end of Marxism as a serious threat the Pragmatists of the _NYT_ and elsewhere recognize that dialectics (advance-retreat-advance or unity-split-unity) is a powerful method of war. Why does this new recognition of the zig-zags of war not extend to Marxist revolution? ________________________________________________________________________________ Marxists on their policy and its lack in the U.S.: "There are no liberals, moderates or conservatives in the Soviet leadership; there are only communists whose actions are determined by the requirements of the long range policy. They may take on a public guise of liberals or Stalinists, but only if required to do so by the Presidium [Politburo?] of the party in the interests of that policy." [Anatoliy Golitsyn, Stalin's KGB archive researcher, _New Lies For Old_, Dodd, NYV, 1984] "I could find no unity, no consistent objective or strategy among Western countries. it is not possible to fight the soviet system and strategy with small steps." [Jan Sejna, former Assistant Secretary of the Czech Defense Council, a very high level Communist Party group with very high level coordination with Communists from other nations, _We Will Bury You_, Sidgewick, London, 1982] The Soviet [Intelligence and Marxist] organs have had an ally in the short attention spans of their adversaries. Thus they have come to rely on the probability that earlier, similar events are either not known or have been forgotten." [Corson & Crowley, _New KGB_] "It is true that the top leadership contains elements which are more prone to advocate the use of direct force (some of the orthodox in the Central Committee of the Party and in the military) while others favor the use of political measures (some in the Foreign Ministry and in the economic sector). but these are meerely differences with respect to means. Soviet leaders are all _aggressive_, all hawks with respect to the final goals of their policy....Men do not reach the pinnacle of Communist power without a strong grasp of political reality....The fable of hawks and doves contesting in the Kremlin has been encouraged for Western consumption by Soviet propaganda and disinformation outlets....[Of the greatest U.S. foreign policy weakness toward the S.U., Foreign Minister Gromyko said,] 'They don't comprehend our final goals....and they mistake tactics for strategy. Besides they have too many doctrines and concepts prpclaimed at different times, but the absence of a solid, coherent, and consistent policy is their biggest flaw'....Gromyko's opinion was generally shared by other Soviet leaders who generally see American foreign policy as likely to zig-zag [chaotically] even during the term of a single administration....Brezhnev [advised] us to pretend in our talks with americans that we ourselves did not take some Marxist dogmas seriously." [Arkady Shevchenko, former Soviet Ambassador to the UN, _Breaking With Moscow_, Knopf, NYC, 1985] "The development of splits in the communist world appeals to Western consciousness in many ways. It feeds the craving for sensationalism [Pragmatism?]; it raises hope of commercial profit; it stirs memories of past heresies and splits in the communist movement; it shows that factionalism is an element in communist as in Western politics; iot supports the comforting illusion that, left to itself, the communist world world will disintegrate and that the communist threat to the rest of the worlds will vanish; and it confirms the opinions of those who, on intellectual grounds, reject the pretensions of communistdogma to provide a unique, universal, and infallible guide to the undestanding of history and the conduct of policy." [Golitsyn, p.82] "Clinton and Foreign Issues: Spasms of Attention" [_NYT_, Mar.22, 1993]. "Clinton targets 'Evil Empire' laws....President Clinton is pledging to work quickly with Congress to repeal "Evil Empire" trade laws and other Cold War restrictions on Russia that no longer serve a purpose. 'There are a lot of statutes that are just antiquated, they're old-fashioned," Secretary of State Warren Christopher said today. 'They've got nothing to do with Russia in the modern world, they've got nothing to do with the new Russia." [(New Bedford, MA) Standard-Times, Apr.15, 1993] This is the sleazy voice of Pragmatism; the denial of relations among things; this is how WW2 started, with the enemies of Nazism exposing their lack of dignity and rationality in public by evading the theory and practice of Nazi politics for a few pleasant lies from Hitler just before the Munich appeasement that cost 50 million lives. "When Hitler made his appeal for peace after proclaiming the restoration of military conscription in Germany, the London _Times_ commented editorially: 'It is to be hoped that the speech will be taken everywhere as a sincere and well-considered utterance[!] meaning precisely what it says." ["Hitler and Khrushchev," G.F. Hudson, _New Leader_, Oct.2, 1961] Of course, Pragmatists will deny any similarity because of (trivial) differences. So Rolls-Royces and Volkwagens are not both cars. The problem is not essentially bad foreign policy but the philosophy which produced the politics which produced the foreign policy. ________________________________________________________________________________ "Marxism-Leninism serves as an unshakable scientific and theoretical foundation. Loyalty to the ideas of scientific communism is the source of the purposeful, principled, and consistent foreign policy of the foreign countries, as well as of its creative activity. Marxism-Leninism is a sound methodological basis, resting on which the socialist countries determine their principled stand and elaborate a long-term[!] foreign policy line....in the 'Inaugural Address of the Working Men's International Association'....Marx pointed out that it was necessary for the working people 'to, master themselves the mysteries of international politics; to watch the diplomatic acts of their respective governments; to counteract them, if necessary, by all[!] means in their power....It is only natural that the foreign policy of each country belonging to the socialist community possesses its own[!] specific features conditioned by historical, geographical, and other circumstances. It is not these circumstances, however, which determine the essence of politics....proletarian internationalism demands, first, that the interests of the proletarian struggle in any one country should be subordinated to the interests of that struggle on a worldwide scale....The ways for the implementation of the policy of peaceful coexistence are not determined by the subjective wishes of statesmen or parties. More than half a century of the Soviet Union's foreign policy shows that at every given period of time these ways depend, above all, on the objective factors, the most important being the balance of forces between the two systems....In the capitalist countries, much money is spent on furnishing information to foreign policy agencies on the present-day international situation. This work, however being empirical and enttirely pragmatic is thereby[!] devoid of true scientific validlity. The very methodological basis is wrong....It is not by chance that in the foreign policy of the USA we witness a permanent renewal of foreign policy doctrines. Each new US President deems it necessary to formulate a foreign policy doctrine of his own....Bourgeois political theory also asserts that in the modern world the role of ideology is diminishing, whereas in actual fact it is growing. This also applies to the sphere of international relations....the so-called de-ideologisation of international relations is pure invention[!]....The assertions by US Professor A. Rapaport that...Soviet foreign policy is allegedly becoming 'less ideologically oriented' are obviously[!] nothing but fabrications....[V. Asparturian, a US sovietologist] asserts that the USSR has allegedly turned into a state interested in preserving and stabilizing the status quo. Such reasoning obviously stems from the urge to compromise[!] the consistent revolutionary course as Soviet foreign policy and present it as a coservative force seeking to perpetuate the existing social relations. [N. Kapchenko, "Marxism-Leninism: The Scientific Basis of Socialist Foreign Policy," _International Affairs_(Moscow), Oct. 1972, p.73; this is the _theoretical_ foreign policy journal of the Central Committee of the CPSU] ________________________________________________________________________________ In "Hard Line, Hard Luck for Cuba," a _NYT_ Op-Ed essay [May 10, 1993], Rolando Prats Paez, a leader of the Social Democracy Movement _in_ Cuba, democracy and helps Castro." This is a classic example of Marxist disinformation. First, Marxist dictatorships, like Cuba, have such an extraordinarily systematic control over their slaves that public dissidence is either impossible, immediately sucicidal, or active measures (political influence operations) by the International Dept. of the national Communist Party. Cuba has representatives of the Party in each residential block(!) surveilling the actions of everybody. The withdrawal of ration cards and employment privileges(!) is a potential threat which makes force mostly unnecessary. The very term, social democracy, is an indication of Marxist influence, especially as socialists have long been massively infiltrated and manipulated (with exceptions) by Marxists. But, the name helps Marxist sympathizers and Pragmatists evade the brutality of Marxism. This is not Marxist propaganda, but disinformation in which the source is concealed (to useful idiots and deaf-mutes). This is how Marxists conduct their revolution, through witting and unwitting (and even half-witting) agents-of-influence among the bourgeoisie. It is an act of war and the Constitution's prohibition of treason covers it, regardless of the "clear and present danger" Pragmatists on the Supreme Court. _______________________________________________________________________________ The following list of Soviet active measures (political influence operations) is only the beginning of research. Some items were taken from "Soviet Active Measures" (John Dziak, _Problems of Communism_, Nov. 1984) and from _New Lies For Old_ (Anatoliy Golitsyn, Dodd, NYC, 1984). Ambassador's (Lockhart) Plot, 1918 Brest-Litovsk Treaty, 1918 Far Eastern Republic, 1920-22 The Trust, 1921-27 New Economic Policy, 1921-1929 Smena Vekh and Eurasian movements, 1920s and 1930s Tanaka Memorial/Institute for Pacific Relations, 1927-late 1930s United Fronts/Willi Muenzenberg(?), 1930s Using America to Provoke Japan, Germany(?) Into War, 1930s Stalin's Religion/Nationalism/Constitution, 1930s-1945 Uncle Joe Against Fascism, 1930s-1945 Tukhachevskiy Affair, 1937 WW2's Spurious "Max" Messages, 1939-1945 WIN in Poland and Elsewhere in East Europe, mid-late 1940s. War Conferences from the Atlantic Charter to Yalta, early-late 1940s U.S Support of Mao, mid-late 1940s Peace Campaign Charging U.S. With Biowar in Korea, 1950(?) Campaign Against Germany and NATO, 1950s and 1960s Numerous Forgeries Against U.S., 1950s-1990s+(?) Phony splits and phony liberalization of Marxist Empire, 1950s-1990(?) Khrushchev's Destalinization/Dissident Activity, 1956 Evolution of the Soviet Regime/Dissidence, 1958+ Second Soviet-Yugoslav Split, 1958-60 Soviet-Albanian Dispute and Split, 1958-62 Sino-Soviet Split, late 1950s-1969(?) Eurocommunism, 1960-mid1970s Brezhnev's Detente, 1960s-1970s Cuban Missile Crisis, 1962 Romanian Independence, 1962-1970s Recurrence of Power Struggles in the Soviet, Chinese, and Other Parties, 1962-? Democratization in Czechoslovakia, 1968 Campaign Against the "neutron" wahead and NATO theatre nuclear force modernization, 1970s-1980s. Attempts to Exploit the Peace Movement, 1970s-1980s Gorbachev's Glasnost, 1985-1991 Withdrawal from Eastern Europe, 1991 Soviet Coup/End of Communist Threat, 1991 Soviet Break-Up, 1991-2 Soviet Search for Foreign Aid, 1992-? The "Cold War" is partly a _continuous_ series of Marxist active measures from 1918 to the present because political war is war just as much as military war. The class enemies of Marxist revolution must officially recognize this. ================================================================================ ZIG-ZAG is archived at (ftp) uglymouse.css.itd.umich.edu: /pub/Politics/ZigZag. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Unless personal discussion is important, comments from NEWS should be posted to the group and then the group's name as well as the date and directory number of the post e-mailed to _ZIG-ZAG_ at <pmsc13sg@umassd.edu>. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Seeking library or other English language edition of _The Problem of Compromise in Politics as Seen by Lenin_ by Alexander Lebedev [Novosti, Moscow, 1989]. Contact _ZIG-ZAG_. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Selling hangmen's rope. Good for capitalists. Long-term payments. See V. Lenin, Red Square, Kremlin. ================================================================================