9k:RD/ rejected meta-Marxist hypothesis (Q28,99)

Main entries

rejected meta-Marxist hypothesis
meta-Marxist error (sense)
R.D. has not done meta-Marxism correctly / R.D. does not have the real meta-Marxism / (9k)

Containing capitalism isn't anarchism
/ I (R.D.) mistook a named Marxism containing capitalism for a named Marxism containing anarchism; capitalism itself (in and of itself) is not an anarchism because it is a class society, similar to how a kingdom is a class society; this is not to imply that anarchists buried deep within capitalism are not an anarchism, just as Trotskyists buried deep within capitalism may still be Trotskyism ->

I was having a lot of trouble with how to label Dengism for a while until just now I realized that if you take Tony Cliff as if he was his own unique Marxism a lot of this confusion actually clears away because the status of either capitalism being contained inside Trotskyism or Trotskyism being fully enclosed in capitalism does not in and of itself contain any anarchism

named Marxism -> I keep saying this and I never properly stop and explain it.
named Marxism -> on this page, a named Marxism refers to a Marxist-tendency object. like, you take a Marxist party, you zoom out on it, you circle the whole thing. that is part of defining what a named Marxism is: the border around the party turns it into a literal named Marxist tendency, like whatever the party is called, or "these are the Trotskyites", "these are the Maoists". the other part of defining what a named Marxism is is the physical content of the Marxist-tendency object in terms of objects and processes. if a party contains Marxist theorists, that is part of its structure. if a party contains Trotskyist theorists and no Stalinist theorists, that is part of its structure. if a party contains people who insist on infiltrating the British Labour Party, that might be party of its structure. if we're back in 1920 and a party has won over a group of soviets, or taken over a cluster of business territories it will have to defend from the White Army, that would be part of its structure. whatever physical strategies a party actually uses or how and whether it forms connections to other parties is part of its definition as a "named Marxism". so... a Fourth International is part of the structure of a named Marxism. and I would now argue it's a surprisingly important part, actually.