revolution and proletariat (jim o'connor)

[Max B. Sawicky]

. . . 
Lenin emphasised out how small a proportion of the working force of Russia,
was proletarian. I think the points made here by Jim O'Connor are broadly
correct. They suggest the thesis that one reason for the fall of
centralised socialism was that it was premature in terms of the development
of the relations of production. And was in fact an inappropriate leap from
certain primitive communists methods of peasant organisation to would-be
socialism.

The alternative strategy would be a mixed market economy of cooperatives,
as Lenin suggested in On Cooperation 1923. He spoke in terms of a
generation perhaps being needed. To apply it now, we have to consider a
century until there is a unified world political system. It would still be
possible to make major inroads by global reforms even while a market in
goods and services develops, hopefully partly on cooperative lines. 
>>

The disadvantages of industrial backwardness for socialism have
become obvious enough.  But on the other end, the planning problem
becomes more difficult, not less, as an economy develops.  More
products, more production techniques, more innovation, shorter
product cycles, etc.  I was all for planning until I studied it
for a while.

mbs