 the Marxist-Leninist concept of the relationship between the two fundamental philosophical categories, matter and ideas. The understanding of this relationship lies at the heart of the Marxist concept of the scientific method. The idealist character of this view led to giving overriding priority to the development of a socialist consciousness while paying inadequate attention to strengthening the material organizational basis of the class struggle. Despite the common idealist character of their philosophies, Lukács, Korsch, and Gramsci differed considerably in their political orientation. Although Gramsci’s philosophical inclinations leaned toward idealism, he was in fact a Leninist in politics (Gedő 1993, 15, citing Argeri 1976, 141).
In the latter half of the twentieth century, the effectively reformist attempt to deny the applicability of dialectics to nature took the additional form of separating Marx from both Engels and Lenin. Marx was characterized affectionately as a humanist, while Engels and Lenin were characterized as crass materialists. Supporters of this view (for example, the well-known Israeli political scientist Shlomo Avineri) assert unabashedly that Marx never accepted the applicability of dialectics to nature, and that we have only Engels’s word for his doing so. Such assertions are made in spite of the fact that Avineri and others of that school were well aware of Marx’s letter to Kugelman in which he wrote that “the dialectical method” is “the method of dealing with matter” (27 June 1870, 528). Actually it was not necessary, of course, for Marx to state explicitly (although clearly he did) that dialectics applies to the sphere of nature. Hegel had already spelled this out in his works, as did Marx himself in Capital and elsewhere. Underlying the attempt to deny the applicability of dialectics to nature is a strong anti-Communism that dissociates itself from any political, organizational forms of class struggle. Reassertion of the integrity of historical and dialectical materialism and its applicability to nature, society, and thought strengthens the theoretical basis for engaging in day-to-day organized political struggle essential for opening up space for the development of a socialist consciousness.
for the full article click here http://www.politicalaffairs.net/article/view/7780/1/355/
Wednesday, January 7, 2009
Arriving in Florida in the 1990's, Gerardo Hernández, Antonio Guerrero, Ramón Labañino, Fernando González, and René González joined private paramilitary groups in order to monitor and report on preparations for attacks against Cuba. For decades, right wing terrorists based in Florida had carried out murderous assaults which have cost the lives of many innocent people.
From the time of their arrest, the Five were subjected to cruel persecution. At their trial, which rampant with bias, the prosecution had free rein to commit egregious abuses of due process. Outrageously long sentences were handed down. UN human rights authorities and international jurists are of one voice in castigating judicial proceedings in the case of the Five.
Violation of civil rights and repudiation of judicial norms are two reasons why we joined the world solidarity movement on their behalf. The CPUSA fights for the Cuban Five also because of dedication to the Cuban Revolution. The U.S. government has cast these five revolutionaries as proxies for a government and people that resist. Our Party defends Cuba's right to protect its national sovereignty against the depredations of empire, and to continue without interference on the socialist path it has chosen.
Wholesale perversion of justice in the case of the Five serves as cover-up for hypocrisy. The U.S. government wages a so-called war on terrorism, yet has long sanctioned violent assaults on Cuba. Safe harbor provided arch terrorist Luis Posada Carriles, who lives undisturbed in Miami, is one example.
The CPUSA issues an appeal for all in solidarity with the Five to reach out to fair-minded, politically conscious people to commit themselves to the Five. Such solid