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. 
================================================================================
********************************************************************************
Beyond and back of the wind,                   |            Stephen Grossman
Little birds fly into the sea,                 |            pmsc13sg@umassd.edu
Morning light shine on me.                     |
                                               |
[Marianne Faithfull & Wally Baderou]           |
********************************************************************************
                           
