Robert Malecki malecki at algonet.se
Fri Apr 26 08:57:45 MDT 1996


>
>	Let's say the people's war (of some sort) is successful.  Peru
>tries to industrialize.  The capitalist nations embargo, the currency is
>made worthless externally and the people's factories cannot produce for
>export.  The government of Peru then pegs the currency to the US dollar,
>accepts US currency, and legalizes the production of concentrated coca
>(implicitly for export), under controlled conditions.  Clearly the U.S. goes
>nuts, but could the western capitalists resist the temptation of the legal
>flow of all that drug money, as the coca cartels send their dollars in to
>buy goods legally?  To what extent could the Peruvian government foster
>coca exportation before the U.S. declared war?  Would Bolivian, Colombian,
>Mexican, and possibly Ecuadoran politicians be made allies of Peru by the
>economic pull of the trans-shipment economy and the, now open, flow of US
>dollars?   Could revolutionary tendencies in those countries be made to
>benefit?
>
>
>
>	What I'm trying to get at is the Marxist implications of illegal (by
>western standards) economies.  Clearly the opponents of the PCP have attempted
>to taint their movement with narco-connection propaganda, so there is no need
>to get in to any defense of that group here.  I just can't resolve the
>question whether revolutionaries should be bound by moralities (against
>opium, coca, marijuana, etc.) that may be the product of a market created by
>bourgeois oppression of the industrial proletariat.
>
>
>	Can a revolutionary movement legitimately use an illicit economy as a
>weapon against capital and/or a way to feed and clothe the revolution?
>
>
>
>	I am absolutely not implying anything about the PCP, but I'm sure
>they will have something to say on this.  Does our new Turkish subscriber
>have anything to put in?
>
I do not think that the question should be raised in this way. But i  think
that revolutionaries should not have any moral obligations to this stuff.
The point here is if it can be used as an excuse for massive military
intervention. Tactically and in the present atomosphere of war on "drugs and
violence" it would sound like a pretty stupid idea and could be used by the
enemy for occupation.

If I remember correctly, in Vietnam that marines were sent in to the
tribesmen of a certain area specifically for this reason. It did not stop
the drug trafficking but put it under control of the American Marine
corps...The drug in question was opium...

Of course if you had the power to put behind the threat of this type of
economy in that several countries a proletarian were to take place involving
a long and protracted war along the lines of Vietnam. Then perhaps there
would be a real poosibility of success. Instead of oil money-drug money. Why
not.

malecki in exile




     --- from list marxism at lists.village.virginia.edu ---




More information about the Marxism mailing list