.
.
Subject: message to IKS
.
.
.
.
.

(IKS is a tiny communist group, who still believe in the plan-economy.
 They also believe in revolutionary vanguardism, more/less traditional
 marxists/leninists and even anti-union.
 http://www.internationalism.org/
 Titled: 'International Communist Current | Workers of the world, unite!'

It says: we can work together until my system goals are achieved, which
are presumably an improvement over the current situation also in the
mind of marxist/leninists.

I also note that the communists have next to nothing in the way of how
society should be organized (next), and their revolutionary theory is
equally absent (it seems to be roughly: 'give us the power, we'll figure
something out there and then.')

But what is the envisioned task of this revolutionary vanguard ? Isn't
it to make up systems and laws for the self-governance of the people ?
To set that up and then hand power to it (which I guess predictably
doesn't always happen, some would say never). In other words, it is a
nonsense strategy because such systems of self-governance can be made up
any day, there is no need to have sovereign power to make up systems and
laws (on the contrary!).

In other words, even on the terrain the marxist/leninist communists had
believed their own, the labor revolution, they are outclassed by my
proposals if for no other reason then that they do not have any proposal
(i don't call 'give us the power' a proposal, sorry.)

If my stuff is more revolutionary at what is perhaps the most essential
task of the marxist/leninists, then maybe it is a small price to pay to
work toward its aims initially, and get an (hopefully) absolute state
democracy and many nationalized infrastructural elements in return ?
The only hard pill to swallow would be that the economy is essentially
about trade, a national free trade economy, with certain important
changes (bringing out the free trade better, by equalizing power to all:
power over land, power in corporations, power in sovereign Government,
and community power over (the larger) investments in the economy.) The
problem here is not that my system wouldn't be left wing (pro-people,
contra-tyranny), or some sort of compromise with the bourgeoisie, but
that the marxists/leninists do not understand that trade is a
progressive issue. They make - in my opinion - a right wing mistake,
because they ignore that total management is impossible over extremely 
large groups, the only way to have it function is through trade, where
trade itself is one of the best protections for labor that exists,
provided labor does actually own what they make, which they do in my
system (and not do in capitalism, or under stalinism).

But anyway, since the marxists/leninists wish to harden in their belief
that trade is bad, that shouldn't mean we can't work together first
toward these aims. If my system ends up needing more plan-economic
components, or even a complete plan-economy (which I don't expect, but
they do), then under my system it would be as easy to get that through
as making proposals and win support based on the misfunctioning of the
given system (which they apparently expect). The new state model is a
true democracy, no longer a power bourgeoisie to contend with either in
finance, media, Government, or industry (nothing that's not under
control of labor anyway), thus their wishes may be far easier reached.

Moreover, they could start new nations and do their own will, for this
only a few million marxist/leninists are needed. By law they can be
free.

I say: nothing to loose (except some pride, but call that a win too, if
my system proves much better then anything marx/lenin ever accomplished 
/ said), everything to win, only opening up more chances for the future...

To make it even better: plan-economy does indeed work in small groups,
which is inside corporations, and in the grandest sense it can work in a
subtle way as a democratized financier under the absolute democratic state.
This means that the plan-economy would get its proper place, where it
does function. Marxists-leninists could therefore either have their own
nations, appeal to all nations for further changes, or live in their own
corporations that are no longer under dire attack from bourgeois capital
and strategic manipulations. Neither would there be the threat of
international war against revolutionary areas.

I see only advantages to support my stuff, and no or few disadvantages.
One disadvantage is that if they keep my stuff quiet, hidden and
unsupported, maybe the catastrophe that capitalism might wreak on the
Earth might compell more people toward marxism/leninism and that they
this way could gain great power or perhaps in their mind do a lot of
good. My system is more appealing to most people no doubt then
marxism/leninism. This means that the old marxist/leninist schemes could
only reclaim historical relevance if my stuff can be ignored
sufficiently. If the communist parties where to push for my scheme,
presumably my stuff would take precedence for the coming decades at
least, over marxist/leninist theory. Maybe that's the reason they
pretend my stuff doesn't exist ? Maybe they 'know' my stuff is wrong,
but it isn't wrong, is it ?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hello IKS,

Betreft: strategische samenwerking

Wij hebben eerder gecorrespondeerd, ik ben schrijver an www.socialism.nl
waar ik tot de conclusie kom dat handel noodzaak is voor eerlijke ver-
deling in zeer grote groepen waar anonimiteit de overhand heeft. Op dit
moment zijn ullie en ik het (blijkbaar) niet met elkaar eens. Echter,
jullie zijn het waarschijnlijk wel met mij eens dat mijn systeem een
(zeer grote??) verbetering inhoud ten opzichte van kapitalisme +
parlement op basis an fractie-democratie ? Ik hoop dat wij in ieder
geval samen kunen optrekken tot mijn systeem-doelen zijn behaald. In ruil
krijgen jullie niets, of beter gezegd: je krijgt een eerlijker systeem,
waarbinnen ook weer allerlei actie en verbetering mogelijk is, zelfs
een plan-economie.

Beste groeten,
jos boersema
[www.socialism.nl Democratie en vrije markt, maar dan echt)