******************** POSTING RULES & NOTES ******************** #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. *****************************************************************
David Walters wrote: > All Permanent Revolution says/advocates/predicts is that > in order to actually *achieve* those democratic *tasks* it will take the > complete overthrow of the existing capitalist regime and the installation by > the working class of Workers Government. That's it. The prediction is completely wrong. For example, many countries have become independent, and most of the colonial system has collapsed. And yet there wasn't workers' government. National independence hasn't brought the prosperity that people expected. It has also left countries subject to political and economic domination. It has not fulfilled the program of radical parties, nor the promises that were made to the masses. But this doesn't mean that national independence doesn't exist. It means that national independence, like all democratic changes, doesn't end exploitation; doesn't eliminate capitalism, but generally vastly expands it; doesn't usher us into the petty-bourgeois idea of the democratic utopia; doesn't guarantee that the working masses will obtain a lot of democratic rights; and so on. Socialism, not mere democratic changes, is necessary for working-class liberation. But national independence changes the class alignments in a country, as various other democratic changes too. The situation in the former colonies is vastly different than what it was before; the struggles in these countries occur in a different social and economic context than before. And democratic changes can also open the way for an expanded class struggle. These changes are of the utmost importance for the working class. To say that national independence or other democratic changes "will take the complete overthrow of the existing capitalist regime and the installation by the working class of Workers Government" means replacing a serious assessment of the social, economic, and political situation with empty Trotskyist dogma. The idea that these changes can't take place until socialism is generally defended by replacing the idea of democratic changes as they occur in the world, with a glorified idea of democracy. It might be said that the democratic struggle cannot be "completed" until the socialist revolution. By this means judging the completion of the democratic movement by whether so many democratic changes have occurred, rather than by the changes in the class alignments and social conditions. If a very backward and abortive change nevertheless results in breaking up the impetus for democratic change, then the overall movement will have to grow up on a new basis. Even though various of the old democratic demands are still set forward, the overall character of the movement will have changed. Marxism showed from the start that democratic changes alone do not end exploitation; the working masses have to continue the struggle to socialism. But any truth can be exaggerated until it's nonsense. From the truth that democratic changes are limited and are not the end of exploitation, one can pass on to the claim that democratic changes can't even take place until socialism. > There are none, ZERO, > preconditions about who or whom to support in achieving this except that to > go "all the way", again to achieve the reason people were rebelling in the > first place, means to break with the capitalists *politically* who may be > part of the initial phases of the revolution and keep the working class > independent. And yet one Trotskyist group after another denounced various struggles in the Arab Spring. If nothing can be achieved unless one goes "all the way" and achieve workers' government, then this does affect what to organize and which struggles to support. However, I think the statement about zero preconditions does reflect one aspect of "permanent revolution". It reflects the idea that I have seen expressed elsewhere that everything is tactical, except that the revolution must continue to workers' government. I think this view has had bad consequences. But that for another time. -- Joseph Green _________________________________________________________ Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm Set your options at: http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
