Re: economics of communist societies

[LPA <blissett@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>Bob Miller wrote
>>
>>Finally, I agree with Harald.  Labour time vouchers were a stupid idea.  I
>>can understand why groups like the GIK came up with them, but that doesn't
>>mean that we should consider them today.  They would be just another form of
>>money and as such would tend to lead to a recreation of exchange and
>capitalism.
>
>The reason why the GIK (Jan Appel) came up with Labour Time vouchers is
>because they seriously confronted the problem of the society transitional to
>communism.   Only fantasists like Subversion and the other subscribers to
>this list can wish this problem of transition away. Marx did not view labour
>time vouchers as necessary for the fully fledged communist society (although
>Harald B seems to think that this was the case).   Furthermore Marx stated
>that labour time vouchers were personal and therefore non-exchangable so
>they would not lead to accumulation of anything. If you are going to
>criticise revolutionaries from the past like the GIK or Marx you could at
>least do them the courtesy of reading carefully what they said and
>understanding why they said it.
>
>Jock (CWO) guesting with Mauro.

 I am confused. In correspondence with the CWO, they rather patronisingly
suggested that my rejection of Bolshevism was because I had "swallowed hook
line and sinker the bourgeoise's message of nasty organisation and nasty
bolsheviks" yet here Jock is describing the the GIK as revolutionaries. I
am presently working on an electronic version of the GIK's "Theses on
Bolshevism" which was also published as "The Bourgeois Role of Bolshevism".
I thought that CWO was one of those proto-party organisations that prided
itself on its political homogenity.

Please clarify

Luther Blissett


http://www.unpopular.demon.co.uk
http://www.dsnet.it/qwerg/blissett/bliss0.htm
http://www.skatta.demon.co.uk




     --- from list aut-op-sy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---