At 10:34 AM 27/08/2007, Louis wrote:
In the July-August International Socialist Review, the theoretical journal of the state-capitalist International Socialist Organization, there’s an article by Lee Sustar titled “What does Chávez have in store for Venezuela?” He asks rhetorically if Chávez is “correct in his recent statements that the ideas of Marx and Lenin are outdated, and that private property has to be preserved in a socialist Venezuela?” He also writes “Chávez himself, quoting the German revolutionary Rosa Luxemburg out of context, declared that trade unions should be subordinated to the socialist party­i.e., the PSUV.”

When I asked Sustar to provide references for these assertions, he replied with respect to the first: “It was on Alo Presidente, which you can hear online.” I have not been successful in tracking this down. He also provided a link to an article on aporrea.org by Miguel Angel Hernández that began with this quote from Chavéz:

El Partido Socialista Unido de Venezuela (PSUV) no tomará las banderas del marxismo-leninismo porque es una tesis dogmática que ya pasó y no está acorde con la realidad de hoy”…“tesis como la de la clase obrera como el motor del socialismo y de la revolución están obsoletas”… “El trabajo hoy es otra cosa, es distinto, está la informática y la telemática, y Carlos Marx ni siquiera podía soñar con estas cosas.

Roughly translated, this says:

The PSUV doesn’t call itself “marxist-leninist” because it is a dogmatic thesis that has passed and doesn’t accord with the reality of today…the thesis of the working class as the motor of socialism and the revolution is obsolete…the worker of today is another thing, is distinct, is involved with information and telecommunications technology and Karl Marx could not have dreamed of these things.

Maybe curiosity killed the cat, but I am dying to know what was between the ellipses in Chavéz’s quoted remarks. It also might be possible to make a distinction between Sustar’s characterization of Chavéz saying that Marx and Lenin were obsolete and his actual words, namely that “The PSUV doesn’t call itself “marxist-leninist” because it is a dogmatic thesis that has passed and doesn’t accord with the reality of today.” Calling oneself “Marxist-Leninist” is pretty stupid in fact.

And, further, the comment about Marxist-Leninist must be seen in the context of the position of the PCV (Vzlan CP) which officially rejected joining in the PSUV because this was the time for the broad anti-imperialist struggle whereas the (always later) struggle for socialism would require a Marxist-Leninist Party. I don't have the specific sources that Louis is looking for but there are transcripts of the 'Alo Presidente' programmes on line. One recent programme (#287) from the state of Vargas (devoted to the idea of socialist cities) was described by ABN, the Bolivarian news agency on 22 July; there, he said roughly:

“I respect deeply the thesis of Carlos Marx and his great contribution to the humanity with the discovery of socialism", affirmed Chávez from the place where the first socialist city of the country is being constructed.

He added: 'I am socialist, bolivariano, revolutionary. I respect the Marxist route, but I am not Marxist. I cannot share that thesis because that is a determinist vision of the socialism”.

He remembered that Marx, “deceived and manipulated, got to approve the invasion from the United States to Mexico and from England to India because he thought that was the route towards capitalism and that soon, as a product of the development of the productive forces, would enter the socialism”.

“Under that argument, we, the backward countries, never would arrive at the socialism because we would have to wait first that they invade us, that they develop us, and then soon to go to socialism”, the Chief of State explained while she talked by telephone with a listener.

Yes, Marx gave some details about how to go from capitalism to socialism, but “that capitalist system was very different from the wild Capitalism of our days and, for that reason, the socialism of today corresponds for us to detail it”.

Jeesh! You mean that we have to do some concrete analysis???? Of course, Marx wasn't a 'Marxist' either (nor was Lenin).
        cheers,
        michael
ps. re the 'working class': probably means the organised-in-trade-union group (which some might view as an aristocracy of labour in Vzla); it is to be noted that he's communing with Negri (his guest for the unveiling of the constitutional proposals) these days.



Michael A. Lebowitz
Professor Emeritus
Economics Department
Simon Fraser University
Burnaby, B.C., Canada V5A 1S6

Director, Programme in 'Transformative Practice and Human Development'
Centro Internacional Miranda, P.H.
Residencias Anauco Suites, Parque Central, final Av. Bolivar
Caracas, Venezuela
fax: 0212 5768274/0212 5777231
http//:centrointernacionalmiranda.gob.ve
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to