Re: Socialist Constitutional Amendment

[Justin Schwartz <jschwart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I think Marx made a big mistake in not trying to argue in detail that
socialism was feasible--I have a paper on this. The work currently in
prpgress by Roemer, Schweickart, Albert & Hahnel, Devine, and yes! Ernest
Mandel attempting to set forth models of a feasible socialism is
absolutely essential if we are to get anywhere. Just now the working class
is not really keen on socialism, thinking that it's what went belly up
(and good thing too) in Russia. They aren't likely to change their minds
without argument that we and they can do better. Promises won't do.
Utopianism is called for. Marx objected to middle class radicals dictating
to the worker's movement and trying to sell socialism to the
bourgeoisie--fair enough, but that's not the same as making suggesting to
the workers and developing models showing that socialism in somne
conceptoion could work, and better than capitalism. If that's not
materialist, so much the worse for materialism.

The Constitutional question is a bit idle. But the issue of socialist
property rights is not. What is collective ownership? Who actually
controls, and how, socialist property? We know that old-fashioned
nationalization only works in certain limited fields and areas. So to
answer the question what we are for, the issue requires more serious
thought than it's been given.

--Justin Schwartz



On Mon, 5 Jun 1995 glevy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

> Isn't the task of "describing a socialist utopia" inherently utopian?
>
> I have no objections to anyone discussing this topic, however, I believe
> that it will only be a practical question in the period immediately prior
> to the revolution.  Marx, it should be recalled, was purposely vague in
> his description of the workings of a socialist system because he believed
> that the analysis of a mode of production can only be satisfactorily
> accomplished after the particulars of that mode of production (and its
> contradictions) become clear.  Of course, many have accused Marx of
> being too abstract when
> describing the functioning of socialism (and indeed many of Marx's
> comments on this subject take the form of footnotes), but I believe that
> his refusal to engage seriously with a discussion of this subject
> reflected his materialist method.
>
> On the other hand, an analysis of actual post-capitalist societies and
> their contradictions is an essential task that all Marxists should
> undertake NOW -- if they haven't done so already.
>
> Jerry





     --- from list marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---

     ------------------