well, it can't escape on it's own and that is one reason it is trying to create a block of allies and trading partners that are not going to jerk it around. New continentally or regionally based or "south to south" kinds of alliances like Telesur and the proposed "ALBA" are critical. And a multipolar global order is definitely preferable to uni- or bipolar.
cp
>As a side note, I would
>be curious as to what kind of influence that Zapatista organizing
>structures had on the organizing in the Venezuelan informal
>sector....
> Joaquin Mueras of the POUM once noted 'you cannot place the map
>of Russia on Spain' in response to the Spanish CP. We shouldn't
>expect that the revolutionary practices of LA to be able to do
>that either.
>
> robert wood, an infantile disorder
>
>> On Feb 29, 2008, at 4:25 PM, Eric wrote:
>>
>>> I know we've been at this before, so it's probably not very
>>> productive, but oh well. You want to evaluate, eg, the Zapatistas,
>>> who are trying to create something more or less "new" in politics,
>>> but you use political criteria that are at least 100 years old? The
>>> Zapatistas want to NOT take state power, but you criticize them
>>> because of who has taken control of the Mexican state? That's doesn't
>>> make any fucking sense. The point of antistatism isn't to get elected
>>> the best possible CEO of the state. It's to practice politics that
>>> sidesteps the state as much as possible. Duh.
>>
>> Yeah, I know all that. I even used to believe it to some degree. The
>> point is that the results so far are sadly lacking. You can't
>> sidestep the state. It's got an army, issues the money, and has a
>> monopoly over the "legitimate" use of force. The Zaps have maybe
>> changed things in a little corner of Mexico. Maybe. Meanwhile, life
>> goes on as if they barely exist.
>>
>> Doug
>> ___________________________________
>> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>>
>
>
>___________________________________
>http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk