>>> nathan.newman at yale.edu 07/13/00 02:22PM >>>
On Thu, 13 Jul 2000, Charles Brown wrote:
> Stiglitz uses the term "market Bolsheviks" to describe the advisers
> who helped bring Russia to its economic knees in the 1990s -- people
> who believed fervently in a rigid fundamentalist doctrine and tried
> to force an entire society to conform to it, just as their central
> planning predecessors had done back in Lenin's day.
> __________
>
> CB: Some real loopity loop anti-communism here. Stiglitz, an
> anti-communist ,wants to have his cake and eat it too. Communism is
> dead, the Bolsheviks long gone. Oh , except the failures of one of
> the ultimate institutions of capitalism , the IMF, can't be criticized
> as capitalism. Capitalism must be portrayed as good no matter what.
> Lets pin it on Bolshevism ! .Stiglitz of Bullshitism.
Now this is an odd definition of anticommunism, since it has to make the claim that Bolshevism = Communism in order to equate criticism of their method of governance as equivalent to criticism of the substantive goals.
________
CB: It's odder to claim that Bolshevism is not communism. Surely you don't think that Stiglitz is not saying that Bolshevism is communism, and that he is not trying to make an anti-communist statement here ? Or do you think Stiglitz thinks communism is something good and he is trying to distinguish communism from Bolshevism ( like you are) ? I don't think so. Stiglitz is trying to make an anti-communist statement, not a subtle distinction between "real" communism and Bolshevism.
________
If "anti-anticommunism" means that anyone who criticizes the Bolshevik mode of leadership and governance is thereby a fascist for making such a critique, then you have created a rather biased rhetorical attack on those you disagree with.
_________
CB: Not everyone who criticizes the Bolshevik mode of leadership and governance is a fascist, no. Not even everyone who criticizes the Bolsheviks is anti-communist, like Rosa Luxemburg. However, nowadays, most who fling "Bolshevik" as a negative epithet are anti-communists. And certainly Stiglitz uses it as an anti-communist . Do you think Stiglitz is making a pro-communist statement here ?
___________
Stiglitz is making a pretty basic critique, common to many communists, socialists and liberals
______
CB: Much, much more common to liberals than communists. Most people who consider themselves communists are pro-Lenin. Basically, most other leftists have ceded the name "Communist" to Leninists.
__________
that the inherent problem with Lenin and company is that their very mode of governance doomed the substantive goals of the Revolution. By suppressing dissent and imposing economic changes outside a democratic framework, they bred a party elite unresponsive to the population that would increasingly either oppress many parts of the population (in the Stalin period) or fail to create the dynamic institutions needed by that population for dealing with technological advance (chronic in later years).
))))))))))))))
CB: Yes, I know about this opinion.
(((((((((((
Many see Yeltsin's coup and the undemocratic imposition of neoliberalism as a mirror of Bolshevik methods, if not substantive goals.
((((((((((
CB: This is sort of the same snafu that Stiglitz is doing here. Bolshevik = Bad. So anything bad "mirrors" the Bolsheviks, even if it is stone capitalist like the IMF or Yeltsin. This would be a better example of what you call above "creat(ing) a rather biased rhetorical attack on those you disagree with" .
((((((((((((
If making that historical comparison of methods makes one an "anticommunist" then that is stretching it far beyond any relation to traditional McCarthyism or other political attacks on the left with which the term is meant. And it sounds like a rhetorical attempt to discredit those who disagree with Bolshevik methods' by a false association with rightwing and fascist elements - a mirror of McCarthyism and "anticommunism."
(((((((((((((((
CB: I didn't say anything about fascist elements. I said loopity loop anti-communism and Bullshitism. And my comment is not rhetorical. It is a substantive argument. It is bullshit to ignore the fact that Bolshevism was in substance the biggest attack and critique yet of the MARKET or capitalism, and call the effort to thrust the market back on Russia a form of Bolshevism.
The main fallacy in your post is that you seem to think that Stiglitz is not anti-communist. That defies common sense. As a matter of fact it is a sort of McCarthyism, because you would be saying that a communist has snuck into a high U.S. government position. It is not a stretch for me to claim that Stiglitz is and is being anti-communist. It is not that Stiglitz is for communism , but he just didn't like the centralized Bolshevik model. He's against communism. For him communism is bad, and so he labels something in capitalism he doesn't like "communism" (Bolshevism), instead of admitting something about capitalism is bad ( in fact exactly something that communists and Bolsheviks would say is bad about capitalism).
______
There is always that hint of rhetorical use of "anti-anticommunism" that becomes a rhetorical attempt to associate opponents with fascism or the rightwing. That kind of guilt by association is exactly what is wrong with red-baiting.
__________
CB: Stiglitz is a liberal and anti-communist.