>>> owner-lbo-talk-digest at lists.panix.com 08/28/01 06:28PM >>>
Todd: Um, I think you're equating what happened in Russia at the start of the last century and what happened to it recently with socialism in general, which is incorrect. Considering the state of Russia before the Revolution, that "forced-march modernization" wasn't such a bad idea if you want to be able to at least try to efficiently feed, clothe, etc. all those people over such a broad geographical area. You can hardly blame Lenin and Co. for trying in the first place. Tahir: I wasn't talking about how it looked to them. That was 100 years ago almost, and also not many of them knew too much about Marxism anyway. Lenin pretty much equated socialism with popular state power plus a higher level of productivity. So did Trotsky. Well in his case chuck in the militarisation of labour as well. But I'm talking about how it looks now, where we have fewer excuses for getting the notion of socialism mixed up with authoritarian welfarism, red fascism and the like.. For example, I don't see that Russia (or Cuba for that matter) did a better job of capitalist modernisation than Franco's Spain. Todd:
And I suspect "people (Lefties? People in general? What?) not really liking it anymore" has more to do with the fact that socialism was never very "popular" to begin with; lots of people believe(d) in it and want(ed) to make it more of a reality, but far more simply don't/didn't care that much (to quote South Park's Chef: That don't disturb me none . . . long as I get my rent paid by Friday." They think they CAN pay their rent every Friday with no problems, given the prevailing economic reality: Capitalism isn't concerned with their always being able to pay their rent; if they can't pay, then they are removed to find someone who can.) for various reasons. Tahir: I didn't say that people aren't into socialism anymore I said that they aren't into Bolshevism anymore, remember? But the slip on your part is revealing. As to which people I'm talking about: well just those who have a real interest in communism I guess.
>I am far from convinced that either of you really have a conception of >revolution that is different to this. I know that Patrick is
>still into some sort of variant of the good ol' national democratic >revolution (delinking, etc,), whereas James is kind of saying hey
>that's not revolution let's have a revolution. But guys what are we >talking about here? Overthrow of a >ruling class to replace it
>with another ('better') one? Overthrow of the entire world capitalist system so as to put an end to classes >or what?
>My point is that real communists should not think of taking political power under any circumstances, except >where the
>opportunity exists to abolish it permanently.
Todd: Abolish political power permanently? Tahir: Yep it's called communism. Remember? All that stuff about classless society, no state, etc. You do remember all that Marxist bullshit don't you?
OK enough for now