Could you kindly elaborate further, Hari? I’m not clear on what lesson you draw from the Venezuelan experience.
On the one hand, you endorse the Leninist concept that there is “no iron wall" between the national democratic and socialist stages of a victorious revolution, which I understand to be compatible with Trotsky's theory of permanent revolution and which served as the basis of the alliance between the two from April 1917 until Lenin’s death. On the other, you refer us to the 1992 article in Compass published by the Communist League UK which asserts: "Castroism rejected the Marxist-Leninist conception of the necessity of two stages in the revolutionary process in colonial-type countries such as those in Latin America, in the first stage of which the national bourgeoisies could play a revolutionary role. It maintained the Trotskyist view that the national bourgeoisies in Latin America had all become agents of imperialism and incapable of revolutionary action, so that the revolutionary process in Latin America would consist of a single stage, that of socialist revolution.” My question is: Do you think Chavez and Maduro should have allied with the Venezuelan national bourgeoisie in line with the Compass position, or should they have moved to fully expropriate it as your quote from Lenin and Michael Roberts’ blog post suggest? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#31332): https://groups.io/g/marxmail/message/31332 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/107582765/21656 -=-=- 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. #4 Do not exceed five posts a day. -=-=- Group Owner: marxmail+ow...@groups.io Unsubscribe: https://groups.io/g/marxmail/leave/8674936/21656/1316126222/xyzzy [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
