Class Analysis of the Stalinist State [formerly, Old M...]

Craig Brozefsky craig at red-bean.com
Mon Feb 4 13:26:43 MST 2002


"Mohammad J Alam" <alam.m at neu.edu> writes:

> This is not a judgement on who should have launched a revolution when. It
> is an observation about the failure of satellite socialism to build
> industry in poorer countries. Again, you can get all defensive about it and
> defend all its achievements, but the point is we obviously need to work
> towards a world revolution and not just praise a guerrilla movement on an
> island with a dictator, to accomplish justice and equality on a global
> scale. Which is of course, what this is all about.

First, what do you expect people to do when you use such rhetoric to
set up your argument?  Your language betrays your intent, which is to
portray the Cuban revolution as a dictatorship and a failure.  If
you're truly seeking dialog and a progression of your understanding
than you need to be very specific in your concerns, and you also need
to consider the positions of those who will need to be your allies
going forward.

Second, the goal is not equality and justice on a global scale, it is
a socialist revolution and a radical change in the relations of
production and property ownership.  Equality and justic are ideas
reportedly (but never in reality) provided by democracy, but
democratic socialism, in order to earn that name, also requires a
transformation of property relations.

> And since they lacked democratic socialism they now lack that low mortality
> rate.

Their life expectancy and infant mortality rate, according to the CIA
factbook is much better than the rest of the Third World, and better
than many of the new capitalist countries, Poland, Yugoslavia and
Argentina in particular.  It is comparable to many first would nations
in fact.  So you are resorting to unsubstantiated remarks that not
even the CIA will back you up on in order to advance your argument and
demonize the Cuban revolution.

> collapse. All this obsession with crude materialist fetishism,
> ie. "property relations", in the face of all contrary evidence of
> the last half-hundred years is ridiculous.

And so far you have proposed a fetishization of justice and equality,
provided by worldwide social democracy of course, attacked with
falsehoods previous socialist revolutions, and prattled on about
"contrary historical records" without anything but hand waving to back
it up.  Your reactionary pursuit of this thread

You cannot have real equaliy and justic without economic equality, and
that is not going to be created by a change in political structures,
but by radical changes in economic relations.  The failure of the
Bolshevik's or the Cuban Revolution to complete that transformation of
economic relations would be a much more fruitful discussion IMO.


--
Craig Brozefsky                           <craig at red-bean.com>
                                http://www.red-bean.com/~craig
Ask me about Common Lisp Enterprise Eggplants at Red Bean!

~~~~~~~
PLEASE clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.



More information about the Marxism mailing list