Re: marxism & (under)development

[malecki@xxxxxxxxxx (Robert Malecki)]

>re: marxism & (under)development
>
>From our vantage point in time, we can see that
>
>social democracy in the west
>marxism-leninism in the east
>and the national liberation movements in the south
>
>were responses to an earlier moment in the evolution of the capitalist
>world economy.
>
>Each presented the only viable alternative within the context in which
>it arose as an emancipatory movement: the seizure/acquisition of state
>power & the pursuit of national development by a party claiming to
>represent the  will of the masses.
>
>Social democracy was never a real alternative in the east, anymore than
>marxism-leninism was a real alternative in the west. & neither were
>truly applicable in the colonial world.
>
>All three movements have essentially been about national development.
>But for the past quarter of a century, national development has come
>to be seen as an illusory option within the capitalist world economy.
>
>So it is that all three have become bankrupt.
>
>The future of the emancipatory movement for social justice makes
>it necessary to absorb the lessons of the past, and respond to the
>demands of the present - which are *global* in nature. Marx's
>critique is more relevant now than ever before. The same, however,
>doesn't apply to social democracy, marxism-leninism and national liberation.
>
>imho
>
>michael
>

Michael,

The above is nonsense. As if concious revolutionary leadership grows out of
certain conditions of a given society. As if the imperialist stage of
capitalism never existed, nor in fact Lenin and the third international.

malecki




     --- from list marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---