Arguably the classical Marxist regimes of the 20th century aren't the only states that weren't controlled by the property holding classes. Bolivarian Venezuela, for instance, constitutes a *decade long* exception to the rule that the state in capitalist countries is a captive of the bourgeoisie.
MG: Venezuela reminds me of Chile under Allende - a situation of "dual power" where the large propertyholders have not been decisively relieved of their property and power. While Chavez's Bolivarian movement controls the central government and appears to be moving forward to secure it's control of the armed forces, bureaucracy, judiciary, etc., I believe the chavistas (and Marxists generally) still see themselves at this stage as administering a "capitalist" rather than a "socialist" state. There also appear to be unresolved differences within the movement, as you would expect, over what constitutes "socialism" and how to get there. So while I am very supportive of the measures the government has taken to empower and improve the living standards of the working class, I'm not yet ready to declare that the currently disorganized Venezuelan bourgeoisie cannot stage a comeback. If it is eventually stripped of its power and property by peaceful means, that in itself would necessitate a powerful rethinking, certainly on my part, of the revolutionary left's understanding - it's point of departure with the social democrats - that capitalism cannot be replaced gradually, through parliamentary legislation, but ultimately requires an armed showdown which culminates with the political and economic expropriation of the capitalist class.
SS: And if Hugo Chavez is an exceptional figure in this regard, what do we make of the whole array of similar national liberation regimes in the post-colonial period, some of which Chris Doss already mentioned?
MG: I don't recall Chris mentioning any such regimes, but I may have missed it. Which post colonial states do you have in mind that you believe could and would no longer described as "capitalist" - by their own governments, international agencies like the WTO, IMF, bankers and investors, mainstream and radical academics, etc.? If not capitalist, how would you describe them - as "socialist" states?
SS: As an empirical matter, it appears there was every gradation of state ownership of the economy in the Third World in the 20th century.
MG: There is a wide gradation in the mix of private and public ownership of the economy in all capitalist economies, not only those in the Third World.
SS: Indeed, the ostensibly Communist regimes themselves demonstrated the entire range of public ownership of the means of production.
MG: Private ownership had been banned and the capitalists liquidated (as a class, and literally) following the revolutions in the USSR and China and did not reappear in Russia or China until the dissolution of the USSR and Deng's post-Mao reforms in China in the last quarter of the 20th century. There were, however, experiments in production within the state-owned and planned economies in response to market forces prior to the restoration of the private sector.
SS: Actually, one of the lessons of the transition to capitalism in the Soviet Union and China, not to mention the industrialization of Meiji Japan, is that far from being merely the control apparatus of the bourgeoisie, the state can be the parent to the emergence of a new capitalist class.
MG: True. However, leaving aside the exceptional cases of the fSU and China - which requires a whole separate discussion - your point doesn't contradict that in such cases the product of such development is a capitalist state and economic system. Such developmental states are necessarily more autonomous because their emerging bourgeoisies are too weak to mobilize capital and lay down infrastructure on their own, particularly where there is a legacy of imperialism. Some may have began with "socialist" aspirations but then bumped up against the realities of the capitalist world market and were forced to adapt to it.
___________________________________ http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk