Re: [Marxism] Permanent Revolution

[Carrol Cox <cbcox@xxxxxxxxx>]

I could not possibly write a more effective damnation of the theory of
permanent revolution than Brian provides here. It shows the utter split
between practice and practice that Haines Brown has explained so
carefully. It also exhibits the fantastic arrogance of those who believe
they can judge revolutions from the outside and merely on a mechanical
combination of a scattering of empirical data and a rigid theory.

Carrol


Brian Shannon wrote:
>
> On May 30, 2006, at 9:22 AM, Mark Lause wrote:
>
> > For all these reasons, I find it best to think of "permanent
> > revolution" not as a theory in which we are to believe or
> > disbelieve, but, in its original sense, as a political goal, in the
> > pursuit of which certain approaches have historically worked better
> > than others.
>
> Along with Lenin's "Imperialism" and similar works of his period and
> since, permanent revolution (as developed most fully by Leon Trotsky)
> is a description of, and program of action for, the modern world
> where the strength of capitalism in the advanced countries
> (imperialism) combined with the political and moral weakness of the
> bourgeoisie in the underdeveloped countries results in a situation
> where in a revolutionary period the workers and peasants in colonial
> and underdeveloped countries have the possibility of taking power and
> dismantling the bourgeois state.
>
> Even where in some instances, such as Turkey under Ataturk, Brazil,
> Argentina, Chile, etc., and perhaps today Venezuela and other
> countries, a radical and sometimes pro-socialist government comes to
> power, its ability to institute reforms is limited by its overall
> economic weakness relative to imperialism and by its very position as
> manager of what remains a bourgeois state.
>
> Thus, in the situation of Venezuela, Bolivia, Nicaragua, et al, the
> capitalist goals of economic and political independence are limited,
> even if for a period of years due to conjunctural economic and
> political events, it may not appear so. They will not achieve true
> economic and social parity with the earlier capitalist states.
>
> This means that on the other side, socialists have the task of
> politically and socially preparing for the replacement of the present
> state apparatus by a workers and farms government. Only if that
> government moves steadily toward a workers state will it be able to
> maintain itself in power and bring genuine economic democracy to the
> working masses.
>
> Brian Shannon
>
> ________________________________________________
> YOU MUST clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.
> Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism

________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism