Re: DOUG H: democracy & imperialism

[Rubyg580@xxxxxxx]

In a message dated 96-04-05 Doug Henwood writes:

>The deposing of Marcos, Duvalier, de Klerk, and the various Latin American
>thugs, and their replacement by pseudo-democratic regimes is hardly a
>setback for imperial rule, at least for now. It confers an aura of
>legitimacy on the rule of capital - one that was seriously undermined by
>these wretched dictatorships. Of all people, Marxists should understand
>this best; we should recognize the coercion behind the money relation and
>the "free" market.

The question here is who deposed these regimes?  If the imperialists had
simply stepped in and arrested them and "installed" their own less exposed
puppet, like they did in Panama in 1989, Doug would have a point here.
But these examples mentioned above were forced on the imperialists and
their local collaborators by the uprisings of the masses.  This does
constitute a setback for the imperialists, although certainly not the kind
of major setback that was caused by the armed revolutions in Cuba,
Vietnam & Nicaragua, or by the People's War and establishment of New
Democracy and Socialism in China.

Imperialism is not free to just do as it pleases in the world in accordance
to its own interests.  It also must respond to the resistance of the masses.
This is what Mao meant when he said, "The masses, and the masses
alone are the motive force in world history."

Yes, we should recognize the coercion behind the money relation and
the "free" market.  That coercion is the coercion of the gun.  It can be
soundly defeated by the guns of the masses, when the masses have
the leadership of a genuine proletarian party.  Even when they do not,
their actions can strike real blows against the imperialist system, blows
that force the imperialists to regroup, change their strategy and tactics.

>Richard Feinberg, formerly of the Overseas Development Council and now with
>the Clinton administration, said a few years ago that democracy only works
>when there's fundamental agreement on the nature of property. With the
>collapse of the USSR, and socialism in general, that fundamental agreement,
>from Wasington's point of view, is in place. Therefore, pseudo-democracy is
>a safe option.
>
>Of course, these democratic openings may, over the longer term, unleash
>forces beyond capital's control. We can only hope....
>Doug

In fact, they have done just that.  In 1990 Johnny Clegg and Savuka, a band
>from South Africa played in Detroit,and Johnny had an interesting observation
about the "fall of the wall" and how it played in S.A.  He said this incident
was
made a big deal of in the media there, because the regime wanted to get
across the message that "communism" is dead, so forget your hopes of
major change around here.  Only the masses took it a totally different way.
They looked at the situation in Eastern Europe and drew the lesson, "look
how quickly and out of nowhere can come forces that topple long-standing
repressive regimes!"

They took heart from THIS lesson, and persisted in their struggle, leading to
the situation where the apartheid regime had to be abandoned in its most
blatant forms in order for the imperialist forces to maintain their overall
controll.  The last chapter has not been written on this or any other of
the struggles of the masses.

Gina/ Detroit



     --- from list marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---