This Clayton attack on @CulturalRadical shows the internal breakdown of pragmatism when confronted by the superior power of the dialectic. Just like prostitutes cannot join forces and eliminate someone for fucking all, neither can pragmatists defend themselves by joining forces. While @CulturalRadical condemns my writing as “rambling” so as to defend WSWS plagiarism, @jamescl86233737 condemns my brain as diseased so as to fight independent research and thought within the working class. The main idea is to replace scientific thinking with following the orders of the Pentagon about what consititutes science and medicine. We, the socialists, reserve the right to condemn military research as unethical and false diagnoses as attempts at false imprisonment, torture, and mutilation. The Nanobureaucracy cannot confront the evils of imperialism by the methods of pragmatism.

As I suggested, the only way forward is through the study of David North’s and Alex Steiner’s attacks on Wohlforth, the leader of the Workers’ League, which constituted in reality a bourgeois assault on the Fourth International’s right to study and discuss dialectical materialism and Marxism. In the name of defending Healy, like Bush claiming to defend Kuwait, the two scholars waged a war on the party to silence all opposition to Healy emerging in the work of their leader Wohlforth and in the working class in general, as if Healy, as Trotsky’s representative on Earth, could never benefit from the open debate and criticism of the working class. (They continued with their policy of overzealous support through his systematic rape of British comrades, through his secret multi-million dollar deals with Saddam Hussein and others, all the while shielding him from criticism until they could seize the power through the declaration of an emergency and a coup. Protection from criticism, in fact, meant Steiner’s psychological “protection” from his own conscience, i.e. the violent silencing through psychological blocks of those “types” of thoughts.) The international policy flowed from the nationalist bureaucratic policy, and this meant defense of critics of Healy in the French section and furthermore no defense of Healy’s supporters within the OCI so that all French comrades must follow Lambert and all British comrades must follow Healy. End of story. No further debate.

This political context is necessary to understand what has happened to the dialectic, to the approach of truth through debate between mutual opposites. The actual discussion and Marxist criticism of the war-ravaged dialectic in the North-Steiner philosophical tract must provide a way forward for the establishment of a competent revolutionary leadership. What we have in the Nanobureaucracy is open fraud and open slander in the name of crushing revolutionary men and women approaching the Fourth International. A cleverly laid trap with bait and all for every Bolshevik Leninist to approach as human sacrifice, as political genocide for a dying religion we might call the Trotsky Cult.

The message of the #Democratic_Power_Faction is this: we have no illusions in the bourgeois court. We cannot prosecute because we are not capitalists. We are worker-saints, worker-Christs, lining up to accept our cross. The Nanobureaucrats fall into our trap by heaping abuse on us and publicly bestowing all the symbols of divine power us, the divine right to rule upon us, while destroying the false claims of their bourgeois courts to legitimacy, of their bourgeois academies’ to academic freedom, of their bourgeois legislatures to free elections and to decorum. In fact, these ideals worth dying for can find no sanctuary within these bourgeois institutions of class oppression.

This old Nanobureaucratic strategy of tampering with witnesses, establishing false testimony gangs, organizing meetings like a Catholic mass where the people must repeat back select phrases ad nauseum. The Catholics at least have a legitimate reason and legitimate cause for the tradition, but the Nanobureaucracy has none. The Nanobureaucracy clearly want to control all testimony by drilling and training recruits into a false and superficial unity. The Catholics do it to defend against the systematic calumnies of the empire against Christ.

What accounts for the fear of the Nanobureaucracy, then, with their monstrously rich chairman and their air-tight witness tampering operation? We see Trump’s home invaded by the FBI, his close associates imprisoned and investigated, we see other leaders such as Argentina’s Kirchner serving six years, Brazil’s de Silva who served time in prison after losing the presidency, we see Israel’s Netanyahu on trial potentially to be sentenced and imprisoned in 2025. We see these prosecutions as different from revolutionary prosecution by revolutionary courts. All the irregularities and delays only begin to describe the problem. At root is the incapacity of bourgeois society to accept the dialectic, the two-sided nature of reality and all real things, as anything but the product of their own personal, subjective, patriarchal will. Theirs and theirs alone. “My corporation. My political party. My newspaper. I own them and I make all their decisions for them. I will hear suggestions made with the right tone and with the clear understanding that they are mere suggestions while my decisions are official.” This line of argument taken to the extreme inevitably leads to prosecution for insubordination, for creating a nuisance, for bribery, for sexual conflicts, etc. It does not allow for debate, for legitimate refusal to follow illegal orders, for the organization of factions, for the raising of funds by workers for worker-run organizations, for the discussion of the reproductive rights of families, couples, or mingling singles.

Such an order becomes literally incapable of defending its tyrants from their usurpers, its usurpers from their tyrants, its employers from their criminals, its criminals from their employers. A chaos reigns in which hardly anything of value is produced, light extinguished into infinity. The light appears not only disadvantaged but completely intolerable to the monstrously rich. We can only sympathize with the elected officials and the debating candidates of the republic, as Marlow does with Kurtz in Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness, surrounded by uncivilized imperialists ready to fracture their skulls, brand them, and enslave them to the imperialist strategy. We also see the immense tragedy for the uncivilized imperialists, who hold only one prisoner. If they kill him they lose all their bargaining power. If they do not kill him, the revolutionary carnage continues to burn its path into the heart of their community.