Shawgi Tell:
> When Nikita Khrushchev became the General Secretary of the
>Communist Party of the Soviet Union and the leader of the USSR in
>the mid-1950s, he advocated that the economic problems of
>socialism can be overcome through the "efficient use of the
>productive forces" and proper "management." Why is it that
>Khrushchev failed as well as all those who followed in his
>footsteps? They all advocated strengthening socialism by
>developing and properly managing the productive forces. Why is it
>that the introduction of these measures gave rise to
>pseudo-socialism and finally the capitalist system, a total
>reversal of the socialist foundation of the society, which is a
>far cry from strengthening the socialist system?
This is interesting. This article I am preparing on "Was Marx for
Capitalism" will spend some time taking a look at Mao Tse-Tung, who
rejected the "stagist" concept of Marxism to his credit. Unfortunately, he
bent the stick too far in the other direction. The productive forces became
almost incidental and volunteerism took over. The dialectical tension
between the need for the productive forces to be mature, and the need for
revolutionary action to abolish class oppression RIGHT NOW defines 20th
century socialist politics.
I would love to see a debate between a leader of Shawgi Tell's
ultra-Stalinist sect and Frank Furedi, orchestrated to the sounds of some
industrial-grunge rock-and-roll band. This would never appear on channel 4
I'm afraid. Public access cable in NYC next to Midnight Blue is more like it.
Louis Proyect
