[lbo-talk] Chavez's socialist world vision

[Bhaskar Sunkara]

First of all, what you directly said earlier is precisely the underpinning
of Third Way, Tony Blair-style politics in both form and content
(non-ideological, all that matters is results).  As socialism for the 21st
century emerging in the periphery that is an impossibility.  I consider
myself a critical supporter of Chavez, but the indicators under him aren't
all that good.  There is endemic corruption, inflation and his policies are
underpinned by Venezuela's oil revenue.  There is also the fact that the
Venezuelan economy has regressed the last few years and there are chronic
food shortages.  Or the prison conditions in Venezuela, which are some of
the worst in the region.  Or the crime, urban decay and social breakdown in
the cities.  As far as "improving people's lives" through his political
influence, what of his "anti-imperialist" support for Mugabe and his close
friend Ahmadinejad?  If you want to exaggerate the emancipatory potential of
caudilloism and promote long dead national roads to socialism that's your
prerogative.  You'll join quite a large segment of the Venezuelan
bourgeoisie.  You should spend a bit more time studying the figures coming
out of Venezuela (or going there) and then if you have a bit of time left
over you can read the Grundrisse (it's quite good).

On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 8:36 PM, Somebody Somebody <philos_case at yahoo.com>wrote:


> Carrol: As I said, it has been quite a while since I last had to scoff at
> this kind of ignoant horseshit.
>
>
> Somebody: It's quite alright, there really isn't any common ground in our
> positions whatsoever. To me, somebody like Chavez is important to the extent
> his government can improve people's lives, whether directly in his own
> country, or as a political influence in Latin America and elsewhere. For
> others, all that matters is where the class forces stack up, and if the
> bourgeoisie hates what they're doing enough.
>
> Moreover, whether a particular movement, individual, or political
> philosophy actually *does* improve people's lives is basically an empirical
> matter, which may rub the more Hegelian-minded participants of this
> discussion the wrong way, I suppose. Alas, this could mean spending more
> time studying mortality statistics and the comparative efficacy of literacy
> programs, and rather less time quoting the Grundrisse, but such are life's
> tradeoffs.
>
>
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>