Louis N Proyect
lnp3 at columbia.edu
Fri May 3 11:42:40 MDT 1996
On Fri, 3 May 1996, Hugh Rodwell wrote:
> Where Nicaragua is concerned we've got to look at the question of what
> exactly they were fighting to defend. And since the land was not
> collectivized, and the state wasn't transformed into a workers' state, they
> were not fighting for their own interests in the same way as was the case
> in the young Soviet Union. This was demoralizing and amplified any
> objectively existing 'exhaustion'.
Louis: Collectivized land? What does this mean? Whose land exactly are you
referring to? The landed gentry in Russia? Whose land, besides their's,
should have been collectivized? Who were the equivalent sectors in
Nicaragua? What do you base you information on? Do you have first-hand
experience with Nicaragua? Who do you recommend as the most reliable
authority on agrarian questions in Nicaragua?
> The second point is the related one of what the Sandinistas could have done
> at the outset to make the struggle for an independent Nicaragua easier than
> it turned out to be. Jim is clear enough on this. Thorough-going land
> reform based on general expropriation of the latifundistas, and production
> (such as there was) run on the basis of worker and peasant control and
> participation through free unions and other workers' and peasants'
Louis: Another Trotskyist with no credentials and no track record to
speak of speaking about what should have been done in Nicaragua. The
Simon Bolivar brigade he refers to were a few hundred Trotskyists who
attempted to "liberate" Nicaragua from Sandinista oppression in 1979.
--- from list marxism at lists.village.virginia.edu ---
More information about the Marxism