(THIS ARTICLE IS MACHINE TRANSLATED by Google from Norwegian)
Odd Handegård mentioned in a debate post that the Leninist version of Marxism carried with it a lot of "ideological muck", but he did not specify what he had in mind. I agree with him, and will try to clarify what I perceive to be erroneous and foolish in the currently authorized Soviet edition of "Marxism-Leninism".
I have a brick of a book lying in front of me: The foundations of Marxism-Leninism, Norwegian edition by the publisher Ny Dag 1962. The book has the interesting subtitle Textbook. It is not meant ironically. I got the book from two friends who are prominent members of the NKP – "like a compass on a stormy sea". It was pleasant, but not particularly tactically done by my friends. The compass showed me a quite different path than they thought: I became seriously aware of the weak aspects of Soviet society. Therefore, I would strongly recommend Norwegian socialists to read this book.
And at the same time I want to ask the question NCP if they really seriously see this book as a "textbook" still. Because of the arsenal of platitudes and unproven claims, I have rarely been absent from so-called serious political literature.
There is no space here to quote in detail. I will only deal with one area – the view on resources, technology and global ecology. I previously challenged NKP on this point, but have not received an answer. In that respect, they are quite similar to their counterparts inside SUF (ml): They are mainly in favor of a credible and scientifically based political line on these issues, so they choose to talk about something else.
The first quote is taken from p. 634: "Socialist industrialization means that there is provision for such a development of large-scale industry, and primarily heavy industry, that it is possible to transform the entire national household and build it up with the most modern mechanical engineering that basis – a development which secures the victory of socialism and anchors the independence of the country concerned in economic and technical terms and its ability to defend the country against the capitalist part of the world".
The quote is followed up with long tirades about choirs in particular socialist the modern technology is. It is a gluttony in science-fiction-tinged future romance that you can only find a match for in older years of Det Beste and Lyn Gordon. The whole time becomes a maximum technologydevelopment is not only seen as "harmless" for a socialist society, but pointed out as the very main condition for transition to communism.
Borgstrøm – his revolutionary point of view on resources and global ecology is neglected by the Marxist-Leninists.
- There is no doubt that capitalism can in some way be embedded in the technostructure, such as both Dag Østerberg and I have covered this in the newspaper, and as philosophers who, among other things, Marcus has pointed to in an international context. – (It surprises me that Dag Østerberg can defend the Soviet Union as strongly as he does, when he has the same views as I do on technostructure and socialism. – Have you read this book, Østerberg?)
There is a single extenuating circumstance that counts as a defense for the Soviet investment in heavy industry in the past: the defense of "the only socialist society" against capitalism, – that is, with the help of capitalist technology and capitalist exploitation of the "agrarian area", the countryside.
But today it seems that Soviet society is caught as in a trap by a strategy that has survived: They will exhaust their resources faster and faster in order to reach "communist society", which paradoxically can become a society where everyone lives in pollution and poverty instead of the wondrous millennial kingdom that is outlined in chapter 27.
But "The basis of Marxism-Leninism" sweeps away all doubts about "socialist technology and science" as "reactionary talk". Just listen:
"What would prevent the task from being solved? Raw material shortage perhaps? That the natural resources that people find in the earth are depleted? Already today, it is beyond any doubt that humans are not threatened by such a danger. (Mi uth.) With the upswing that is taking place in agriculture, enormous raw material resources can be made available for the production of necessities. But even more promising is the development and use of certain synthetic substances, which are not inferior to natural substances in quality and even surpass them in many respects. Man has learned to extract high-quality new substances from coal and natural gas, oil and timber waste, from seawater and even the air. This is a path that makes it possible to solve the raw material problem completely in the near future.»(Mi uth.)
The quote speaks for itself: Marxist-Leninistane have found the "philosopher's stone" in the revolution and the proletariat's takeover of the accelerating technology. Through the revolution, there will be enough resources for all of us.
This is reminiscent of an old, good profession from the Middle Ages: Goldsmithing – alchemy. While a whole globe outside is about to wake up to the nightmare that a runaway technology threatens us with, the Marxist-Leninists still sit and root in the mud in their alchemist retorts.
