[Marxism] Re: Bolivia
lnp3 at panix.com
Mon Jan 16 11:23:51 MST 2006
>5. It's clear from Louis Proyect's response that one of the things that has
>touched a real raw nerve in this discussion is my questioning American
>radicals who vehemently denounce the MAS as not "sufficiently revolutionary"
>while simultaneously supporting the Greens - whose programme is no less
>reformist - in their own backyard. They are having trouble reconciling this
>contradiction, and so the answer they are giving is that "well, conditions
>in the two countries are not the same".
Actually, the MAS is far to the left of the Greens who have refused to take
a stand on capitalism as a system. But in the USA, the Greens were a step
forward against the two-party system just as Morales's candidacy was a
retreat from the uprising that took place last year, when as the Guardian
reported miners hurled dynamite at the army. If Ralph Nader retired to
Bolivia and ran as President against Morales with all his Jeffersonian
nostrums, one would certainly reject his bid. But context is everything. It
just confuses things to lump the USA and Bolivia together, but I assume
that was Gandall's aim all along.
>This is absolutely 100% true, but the pro-Greens on this list have it ass
>backwards in suggesting the Green party is an appropriate venue for Marxist
>intervention while the MAS is not.
If the miners in West Virginia who had just lost their brethren at Sago
went on a militant organizing drive and decided to run Labor Party
candidates to strengthen their movement, it would be criminal to back a
Green food coop manager running in the same race. Context is everything.
More information about the Marxism