"A collapse of the Soviet regime would lead inevitably to the collapse of
the planned economy, and thus to the abolition of state property. The bond
of compulsion between the trusts and the factories within them would fall
away. The more successful enterprises would succeed in coming out on the
ro
Jim Devine:
>And we should trust a Communist Party with a monopoly of political power?
>Louis, didn't you have some troubles a few years ago with the self-styled
>Leninists of the SWP? doesn't that suggest some lessons about giving power
>over to a minority?
I am not talking about democracy. I
I want to amplify on some of Sam Pawlett's comments. Vietnam, to remind
youngsters on the list, had a proletarian revolution in the 1970s that like
China was largely led by peasants. Peasant support was tied to the
cooperatives that provided a form of social insurance and security in the
countrysi
>Louis Proyect wrote:
>
>>In any case, this business about semifeudal patriarchy versus 'liberated'
>>sweatshops is a false dichotomy.
>
>Indeed it is. So why'd you set it up that way?
>
>Doug
Why are you asking?
Louis Proyect
Marxism mailing list: http://www.marxmail.org/
Jim Devine:
>the kind of socialism built depends on which groups have the power in the
>process of building it. Which groups had the power? the CP?
Yes, the Communist Party had the power.
>I just don't see that revolution as "proletarian" unless the organized
>proletariat has a lot of power in
At 06:16 PM 05/10/2000 -0400, you wrote:
>"A collapse of the Soviet regime would lead inevitably to the collapse of
>the planned economy, and thus to the abolition of state property. The bond
>of compulsion between the trusts and the factories within them would fall
>away. The more successful ente
>>> Jim Devine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 05/10/00 03:54PM >>>
I don't think the issue of democracy should be separated from the class
nature of the state. At least as I understand Marx, he believed that the
proletariat would be a different kind of ruling class than previous ruling
classes, that it
At 03:13 PM 5/10/00 -0400, you wrote:
>Jim Devine:
> >And we should trust a Communist Party with a monopoly of political power?
> >Louis, didn't you have some troubles a few years ago with the self-styled
> >Leninists of the SWP? doesn't that suggest some lessons about giving power
> >over to a mi
> Trotsky was very smart.
>
So why did Stalin outsmart him in the struggle for power?
Louis Proyect wrote:
>In any case, this business about semifeudal patriarchy versus 'liberated'
>sweatshops is a false dichotomy.
Indeed it is. So why'd you set it up that way?
Doug
On Tue, 9 May 2000, Louis Proyect wrote:
> About 4 million hectares of land were scheduled for reallocation after
> 1988. After the transition, the social bonds in the countryside were
> profoundly shattered. The basic structure of the nation was placed under
> severe stress and dispossessed peas
Dennis Redmond:
>But how do explain the fact that living standards have risen dramatically
>in the countryside side during doi moi?
The Baltimore Sun, August 6, 1995:
[W]alking through Huong Tho Phu village in southern Vietnam, you can easily
see why the south dominates the national economy. The
Jim Devine:
>I don't think the issue of democracy should be separated from the class
>nature of the state. At least as I understand Marx, he believed that the
>proletariat would be a different kind of ruling class than previous ruling
>classes, that its rule would have to be democratic.
Yes,
Louis Proyect writes: >I want to amplify on some of Sam Pawlett's comments.
Vietnam, to remind youngsters on the list, had a proletarian revolution in
the 1970s that like China was largely led by peasants. <
I'm not a youngster (nor do I play one on TV), but in what sense was that
revolution "
I wrote:
>I don't think the issue of democracy should be separated from the class
>nature of the state. At least as I understand Marx, he believed that the
>proletariat would be a different kind of ruling class than previous ruling
>classes, that its rule would have to be democratic.
Charles Brow
I wrote:
> >the kind of socialism built depends on which groups have the power in
> the process of building it. Which groups had the power? the CP?<
Louis Proyect writes:
>Yes, the Communist Party had the power.
And we should trust a Communist Party with a monopoly of political power?
Louis, d
>>> Jim Devine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 05/10/00 05:29PM >>>
I wrote:
>I don't think the issue of democracy should be separated from the class
>nature of the state. At least as I understand Marx, he believed that the
>proletariat would be a different kind of ruling class than previous ruling
>classes
Jim Devine:
>I'm not a youngster (nor do I play one on TV), but in what sense was that
>revolution "proletarian"? were wage-workers (proletarians) organized in a
>workers' political party and democratically-run unions in state power? I
>doubt it.
It was proletarian in the sense that the goal o
I wrote:
>BTW, a friend (an expert on Soviet agriculture and politics) who spent a
>year in the USSR in 1977 or so reported that Soviet academics were
>expected to quote from Lenin in all articles (including articles on soil
>chemistry). But they weren't supposed to quote from THE STATE AND
>R
>>> Jim Devine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 05/11/00 12:15PM >>>
I wrote:
>BTW, a friend (an expert on Soviet agriculture and politics) who spent a
>year in the USSR in 1977 or so reported that Soviet academics were
>expected to quote from Lenin in all articles (including articles on soil
>chemistry).
I wrote:
> >I don't think the issue of democracy should be separated from the class
> >nature of the state. At least as I understand Marx, he believed that the
> >proletariat would be a different kind of ruling class than previous ruling
> >classes, that its rule would have to be democratic.
Loui
Jim Devine wrote:
> >I don't think the issue of democracy should be separated from the class
> >nature of the state. At least as I understand Marx, he believed that the
> >proletariat would be a different kind of ruling class than previous ruling
> >classes, that its rule would have to be democr
Regardless of how the USSR perceived Lenin's texts in 1977, _State and
Revolution_ including _What is to be Done_ were written particulary
_against_ anarchism, secterianism and vulgar economism so typical
of Russian politics at the turn of the century.
Mine
>>> Jim Devine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I wrote:
> > in what sense was that [Vietnamese] revolution "proletarian"? were
> wage-workers (proletarians) organized in a workers' political party and
> democratically-run unions in state power? I doubt it.<
Louis answers:
>It was proletarian in the sense that the goal of the revolution
I did *not* misunderstand what you wrote. You just threw ideas without
explaining them. that is why, your post is open to misinterpretation. I
would like to see the quotes to know how Marx "anticipates"
Stalinism...as a person partially trained in economic history, it seems
to me a very "ahistori
>... The argument that Marx anticipated Stalinism is completely a
>historical statement, made out of context, which pays attention to "ideas"
>rather than to circumstances of Stalin's Russia. Projecting Marx onto
>Stalin or vice versa is an idealist reading of
>history. Ideas should be judged
At 09:40 PM 5/10/00 -0400, you wrote:
>I did *not* misunderstand what you wrote. You just threw ideas without
>explaining them. that is why, your post is open to misinterpretation. I
>would like to see the quotes to know how Marx "anticipates" Stalinism...as
>a person partially trained in econ
27 matches
Mail list logo
