Re: [Marxism] Re: State capitalism -- addition

[Louis Proyect <lnp3@xxxxxxxxx>]

> Anyone have much experience or thoughts on the distinct socialist model in
> Yugoslavia?
>
> Ian

We should not slip into a kind of economism in discussing these questions.
We are not simply evaluating capitalist and noncapitalist countries on the
basis of income. Something that gets short shrift in the state capitalist
press is the importance of USSR for liberation movements worldwide. Despite
the bureaucratic shortcomings of the Kremlin elites, they did make it
possible for Cuba and Vietnam to triumph. They also were a bulwark of
support for the ANC. Despite the failure of the ANC leadership to challenge
capitalist property relations in South Africa, the abolition of apartheid
and the dismantling of Afrikaner sub-imperialism is a big step forward for
the continent. Obviously from my review of "Hotel Rwanda," there is much
more that has to be done.

Without the example and the support of the USSR, you see much more of an
Islamic radicalism presence in the Middle East and elsewhere. You also see
a much more aggressive attack on workers in the advanced capitalist
countries, since the USSR no longer serves as a counterweight. With the
decline of the USSR, you have a decline of the CP's, which means a
weakening of the trade unions. And all this serves to undermine social
democracy.

Now, it is obvious that the USSR is not anybody's socialist ideal here. But
that country represented a gain for working people worldwide. The triumph
of capitalism in the USSR is not a good thing, even though it coincides
with the collapse of Stalinism worldwide. This is something that I found
profoundly wrong in the analyses of Suzie Weismann and the late Julie
Jacobson, who seemed to hate Stalinism more than they hated capitalism.




Louis Proyect
Marxism list: www.marxmail.org


_______________________________________________
Marxism mailing list
Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism