^^^^^^^ CB: It's really laughable that that the historical precedents for robust market reforms you refer to have existed at the most for 30 years, and based on that you now declare that they are irreversible for all times. You sure got a powerful crystal ball.
^^^^^^^
Ironically, the falsification of Marxism as a mode of production also confirms it's class-struggle perspective - once a new bourgeoisie is established, it won't surrender it's control without an entirely new revolution. Which of course, contrary to Trotsky, won't happen. The workers aren't going to resurrect the ancien régime once it's own founding fathers have abandoned it.
^^^^^^ CB: Boo hoo .Your leap to the conclusion and pronouncement of a new permanence of the capitalist mode of production seems to be based in subjectivity and personal pessimism.
^^^^^^^
I know Carrol seems to think ideology and a belief in socialism as a viable economic alternative doesn't really matter, but historical experience seems to suggest otherwise. Was it a coincidence that the *only* region of the world to have a resurgence of the left in the first decade of the 21st century was also the homeland of an enduring Cuban revolution? Of course not. There would be no Bolivarian left if Fidel had cried uncle in 1992 and joined the rest of the international old guard in embracing capitalism. It doesn't take a clairvoyant to predict what's likely to happen to the Latin American left in the coming years.