On Sat, 21 Feb 2009 16:35:43 -0800 (PST) Charles Brown <cdb1...@prodigy.net> writes: > > > > --- On Sat, 2/21/09, Jim Farmelant <farmela...@juno.com> wrote: > > > From: Jim Farmelant <farmela...@juno.com> > > > > > The Socialist Workers Party (USA) has long been insistent > > that Russia remains a kind of "workers state." > > Their formulations > > strike me as nutty, but I think that they have stumbled on > > to > > a facet of post-Soviet life that merits further > > exploration, > > which is that many aspects of the Soviet system have > > managed > > to survive the collapse of the Soviet Union. Indeed, given > > the recent economic downturn which has now begun to > > impact Russia, it is quite possible that we might see > > Russia > > reverting back to Soviet-style economic and social policies > > in order to maintain order. > > > > It also seems to be the case that the same is true for > > some of the other former Warsaw Pact countries as well. > > The Czech Republic for instance has since 1989 been > > governed mostly by rightwing governments that have > > been avowedly committed to neoliberal economic > > policies, and yet I have read that much of the social > > safety net that was built up under the Communist > > regime has remained more or less in place since > > 1989. That indeed it has been the continuing > > existence of this social safety net that made it > > possible for the post-Communists governments > > to gain the acquiescence of the Czech masses > > in the creation of a market economy there. > > ^^^^^^ > CB: It is interesting that the social > safety net remained, because as I understand > it, neo-liberalism is supposed to strip > away welfare and the social safety net. > So, perhaps the name was "neoliberalism" > but the facts on the ground were not so > neo-liberal. > > It really will be interesting to see > what happens now if the world wide > recession/depression batters > what ever free-market institutions > that were actually established in > Eastern Europe, Russia and the rest > of the former Soviet Union. Their > stock markets are likely to be more > fragile and limited than those in the > US and Western Europe. A crash of > neo-phyte stock markets could be > their end or lead to their permanent > limitation. Besides the social safety > net, how far could they really go > in privatizing basic means of production > and basic necessities > industries, such as food, utilities, mass > transit, water, gas, electricity, telephone? > Those are only half private in the > US. It probably wouldn't be a very > big step to nationalize them - permanently. > The same with the banking system.
Well in Russia the state renationalized most of the energy industry several years ago. Putin, as president, went a long way towards reestablishing the leading role of the state in the management of Russia's economy. The state is a major stockholder in many of Russia's largest companies. One of Putin's big achievements was to rein in the oligarchs who had taken control of much of Russia's economy under Yeltsin. All this course takes us back to a lot of the old debates over the nature of the former Soviet Union: was it socialist? was it state capitalist? a degenerate workers state? a bureacratic collectivism? And to those old debates we can now can add debates over the nature of contemporary post-Soviet Russia. The post-Soviet regimes of Yeltsin and Putin had the avowed aim of restoring capitalism, but it seems that the reality there is perhaps more complex. They never could entirely obliterate Soviet-era institutions and practices, and now, I suspect, that the current world economic practice may force the current government of Medvedev and Putin to revive many of the old Soviet policies. I suppose that we might characterize the current Russian economy as a kind of state capitalism with some socialist characteristics. Jim F. > > In Eastern > Europe, and countries like Latvia, > Estonia and Lithuania with no Russian > troops there anymore, there may be > little reason to resent socialist > organization, socialist _self_organization > and self-determination. > > Perhaps socialism will come as a > negation of the negation of the > first experience of socialism. > > They don't have to call it > "socialism" or "communism" Just call it > "economic democracy and freedom" > or social democracy or > democratic socialism. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Marxism-Thaxis mailing list > Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu > To change your options or unsubscribe go to: > http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis > > ____________________________________________________________ Click to learn about options trading and get the latest information. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/BLSrjpTIzQaKqKDWtUHB687b2RagjNMBwhGf2qCMhoLUSDzR8181lroxupC/ _______________________________________________ Marxism-Thaxis mailing list Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis
