One needs to first understand Marx before even talking about Leninism..
Mine
>Then we are at an impasse. I think it is worth while to rescue the
>language of >socialism and Marxism from the Leninist distortions, but
perhaps it is >not. >Perhaps we have to invent a new political language.
Rod
"J. Barkley Rosser, Jr." wrote:
> Rod,
> I would prefer the kind of socialism that you
> describe. But, like it or not, I would still maintain
> that what we saw in the USSR was a form of
> socialism.
> Barkley Rosser
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rod Hay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Monday, May 22, 2000 4:20 PM
> Subject: [PEN-L:19425] Re: Withering away of the state
>
> >First, let's start with the word socialism and what it means. To me the
> minimum
> >would be some socialisation of the means of production (I distinquish this
> from
> >nationalisation). This entails the establishment of democratic institutions
> >capable of managing that control. I take this to be what Marx meant by the
> >withering away of the state. The state as a institution of a divided
> society
> >would be replaced, as those divisions were resolved, by alternative
> democratic
> >institutions (the division between the public and private sphere being one
> of
> >the most important divisions, would thus be overcome).
> >
> >The Soviet Union did not attempt to construct these institution, (in fact,
> after
> >the initial period of the soviets, they did everything in their power to
> destroy
> >alternative centres of power.) Yugoslavia and Cuba did more in this and
> have a
> >greater claim to being socialist.
> >
> >The Soviet Union was a society in which the division between capital and
> labour
> >was still strong. Capital, was for the main part, controlled by the
> bureaucracy,
> >but it still existed as an opposition to labour. Little was being done to
> >overcome this division. The Soviet Union was one of the world's most
> developed
> >welfare states but it was not socialist, it was most definitely a society
> in
> >which capital still ruled.
> >
> >Rod
> >
> >"J. Barkley Rosser, Jr." wrote:
> >
> >> Rod,
> >> In what way was it not? The USSR followed most of the
> >> "planks" in the platform at the end of the Communist
> >> Manifesto. It even, under Khrushchev, attempted to
> >> maintain greenbelts and carried out other policies
> >> motivated by the essentially utopian goal of eliminating
> >> the distinction between the city and the country.
> >> What it was not was communist. And neither it nor
> >> any other socialist state (that I am aware of, maybe Pol
> >> Pot made such claims) ever claimed so to be. The official
> >> line in the old USSR was that they were a socialist state
> >> "in transition" to a communist future that never arrived.
> >> BTW, to those who are getting upset that I have made
> >> some critical remarks about Marx, I say that I am a great
> >> admirer of Marx and fully agree that he was very perspicuitous
> >> about many matters, arguably the most brilliant economist
> >> of the nineteenth century, certainly one of the most. But, he
> >> was not a god or a messiah or a prophet. He was a human
> >> being subject to errors, no matter how brilliant or wise he was.
> >> Even if one wishes to designate him as "error-free," clearly
> >> his writings are open to many interpretations in many places,
> >> as we all well know.
> >> Barkley Rosser
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Rod Hay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> Date: Thursday, May 18, 2000 7:49 PM
> >> Subject: [PEN-L:19253] : withering away of the state
> >>
> >> >Perhaps Marx was utopian. But we will have to wait until we have a
> >> socialists
> >> >society, in order to find out. The Soviet Union called itself socialist
> but
> >> it
> >> >wasn't.
> >> >
> >> >"J. Barkley Rosser, Jr." wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Jim,
> >> >> I did not mean that the vision was pathetic. I
> >> >> meant that the actual outcome in light of the vision/
> >> >> (forecast) was pathetic.
> >> >> Barkley Rosser
> >> >> --
> >> >
> >> >--
> >> >Rod Hay
> >> >[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> >The History of Economic Thought Archive
> >> >http://socserv2.mcmaster.ca/~econ/ugcm/3ll3/index.html
> >> >Batoche Books
> >> >http://Batoche.co-ltd.net/
> >> >52 Eby Street South
> >> >Kitchener, Ontario
> >> >N2G 3L1
> >> >Canada
> >> >
> >> >
> >
> >--
> >Rod Hay
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >The History of Economic Thought Archive
> >http://socserv2.mcmaster.ca/~econ/ugcm/3ll3/index.html
> >Batoche Books
> >http://Batoche.co-ltd.net/
> >52 Eby Street South
> >Kitchener, Ontario
> >N2G 3L1
> >Canada
> >
> >
--
Rod Hay
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
The History of Economic Thought Archive
http://socserv2.mcmaster.ca/~econ/ugcm/3ll3/index.html
Batoche Books
http://Batoche.co-ltd.net/
52 Eby Street South
Kitchener, Ontario
N2G 3L1
Canada
