Bruce Robinson wrote:
> ...and exploits and oppresses its own working class and peasantry. Rather
> than hiding behind the argument that Americans have no right to criticise
> North Korea, perhaps one of the apologists for this 'socialist' state based
> on the hereditary principle can explain what exactly it is in North Korea
> they are defending.
>
> Carrol at least is honest when he writes: ' "Ancient Despotism" (whatever
> that means precisely) probably is in the 20th century far preferable for a
> small third world country than submission to the World Bank/IMF. ' However,
> those aren't the only alternatives and neither of them has anything to do
> with socialism.
Bruce's logic seems to run somewhat as follows:
Bleach causes colors to run. No, that's not true, because it has nothing to do with the different tastes of jonathan and deliciou apples.
Actually, of course, *nothing* that anyone can do or say at this particular point in history has other than (at best) very indirect connection with socialism -- unless, of course (as seems to be the case with Bruce and the other raving ultra-lefts on this list) Socialism is not a practice, a struggle, a movement but, rather, merely a religion which one practices only in the depths of one's heart.
The question is not socialism. The question is the terrible task faced by the peoples of the third world in achieving any freedom of action whatsoever from the pressure of u.s. imperialism.
So far as I know four, and only four third world countries attempted to pursue independence from the United States while maintaining "democratic" practices: Iran under Mossedagh (sp?), the Dominican Republic under Juan Bosch, Chile under Allende, and Nicaragua under the Sandinistas. Can anyone name a third world nation which attempted to escape imperialist control, maintained Brad's kind of democracy, and survived?
Very seriously, the carpers should at least consider the possibility that national independence for the victims of imperialism is only achievable through something which the U.S. and unwary leftists will denounce as a cult of personality.
Carrol