<html><body>
<DIV>So where does the Green Party part fit? Many Greens take decentralization as one of their most important principles. Does your anathema of the state extend to that as well? SR</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">-------------- Original message -------------- <BR>From: Eric Beck <rayrena@realtime.net> <BR><BR>> <BR>> > Somehow I fail to see what creepy Green Party-Populism and <BR>> >statist socialism have in common. While I disagree with some aspects <BR>> >of Yoshie's view of the internal affairs of the Iranian state, it <BR>> >seems fairly clear that she is no "state socialist" as that term is <BR>> >generally used <BR>> <BR>> An admirer of Lenin and Hobbes who believes that any future <BR>> socialist/communist movement must take control of the state to be <BR>> successful not a state socialist? What is a state socialist then? <BR>> <BR>> As far as the commonalities, briefly: Both populism and socialism <BR>> find their representation/justification in the figure of "the <BR>> people." The state is coterminus with the people, meaning there
is <BR>> always an other who is not the people, outside of the state, and <BR>> populism and socialism are two types of politics that attempt to take <BR>> hold of state power in order to carry out the function of drawing <BR>> (and constantly redrawing, whenever it serves their purposes) the <BR>> boundary between the people and the not-people, inside and outside <BR>> the state. State socialism (eg, Chavismo) of course tends to exclude <BR>> less along racial and gender lines that populism (eg, the US <BR>> anti-immigration movement), but it still reserves the right to fix, <BR>> but not dissolve, the boundaries. <BR>> ___________________________________ <BR>> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk </BLOCKQUOTE></body></html>