[Marxism] From Links: Two useful comments on "The Spectre of Socialism for the Twentieth Century" by Mike Lebowitz

["Fred Feldman" <ffeldman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Lebowitz's article, which is somewhere in the recent list archives, can also
be found at http://links.org.au/node/503.


1.
http://links.org.au/node/503/1594#comment-1594

Fri, 07/04/2008 - 01:19 ? Richard Fidler 
Internationalism, strategy and 21st century socialism
Like most such pieces by Mike Lebowitz, going ?beyond Capital? tends to take
us back to Capital, and even further, to the Grundrisse and the early Marx.
Not to deny the relevance and usefulness of this exercise. Mike has done a
great job of exegesis on some of the very essential ideas of Marx and
Marxism in his books and his descriptions of 21st socialism as it is being
discussed in the Venezuelan context.

But what I find lacking in much of this material, including this article, is
strategy -- the topic of much of 20th century socialist debate and conflict.
How do we get from here to there? Mike offers some useful leads: ?practice
as essential for human development?; attention to ?all activities of people?
and to ?the goals of workers... in their communities?, and not just to
industrial workers; social ownership (which can include non-state forms of
organization of economic activity); ?protagonistic democracy in the
workplace?, etc.

But when we get down to examining the ?earthly presence? of this 21st
century spectre, in the Venezuelan experience to date, we find that the
Bolivarian revolution is experiencing many of the same difficulties and
challenges experienced by revolutionary socialists in the 20th century. The
cooperatives and recovered factories, as primarily local and often isolated
experiments, are still confronted with the negative effects of the law of
value in determining investments and organizing workers self-management
(which Lebowitz often confuses with workers control, and vice versa). The
communal councils are a promising development, by all accounts, but as he
says they need to evolve a larger regional and national presence as well if
they are to develop into ?socialist communes?. Venezuela is still terribly
dependent on food imports; its agrarian reform is very limited and
undeveloped; we are still a long way from overcoming the deep-rooted
?culture of corruption and clientelism? in the state structures and Chavism
itself that Lebowitz correctly underscores. These are the kinds of problems
that were encountered by the social revolutions of the 20th century,
provoking many debates, proposals, approaches, and producing many examples
of both successes and failures.

There are no ideal ?models? to follow, but we do have some useful past
experiences to examine and learn from. In this regard, the varied
experiences of the Cuban revolution, for example -- in the 20th century, no
less -- are of great value in assessing the tasks facing the Bolivarian
revolution.

The challenges facing the revolution in Venezuela call for strategic
responses, that is, not just the kind of democratic, participatory goals now
identified with 21st century socialism, but some coherent approaches that
can be pursued and implemented with the assistance of a revolutionary cadre
that learns how to assimilate lessons of previous experiences, international
as well as national, and to think through and tackle the new problems that
arise in today?s context. That is why I would question Mike Lebowitz?s claim
that ?the internal struggle within Chavism [is] the main obstacle to the
success of the Bolivarian Revolution.? In my view, that struggle, which is
being waged today on all fronts of the revolution (communal councils,
factories, farms, universities, etc.) and not just within the PSUV debates
and organizational conflicts, is crucial; there must be a ?revolution within
the revolution? to build a national leadership that can continue leading the
process forward.

But perhaps Lebowitz is saying much the same thing. As he puts it at the end
of his speech, ?the struggle between this ?endogenous right?... and the
masses who have been mobilised is the ultimate conflict which will determine
the fate of the Bolivarian Revolution.?

In this context, there is a dimension to that revolution that is extremely
important, although it is only alluded to briefly in Mike?s speech. That is,
its international dimension. He mentions ALBA, the links with Cuba and
Bolivia (Ecuador and Nicaragua could also be cited). As he says, these
still-embryonic relations of trade and mutual social development assistance
are ?based upon solidarity rather than exchange relations?. And that too,
must be a key ingredient of 21st century socialism ? although it receives no
mention in Mike?s book Build It Now. 

The internationalism of Chávez?s socialism is a key feature that links the
Bolivarian Revolution with Cuba?s and other attempts to build an
anti-imperialist, democratic, pluralistic alternative and begin building a
socialist society in the Latin American context. And it renews with a key
feature of communist strategy in Lenin?s time, the attempt to build
meaningful international experiences of solidarity and mutual assistance.
Socialism will make little progress in Venezuela, or any other country in
Latin America, without a qualitative advance in continental unity and
integration. As the Cubans say, it is integration... or annexation to the
Empire, North American imperialism. The stakes are nothing less.

2.
http://links.org.au/node/503/1594#comment-1595

Fri, 07/04/2008 - 12:09 ? Felipe Stuart Cournoyer The specter of Bolivarian
internaionalism
Richard Fidler?s comments on Mike Lebowitz?s talk are very to the point,
And need to be discussed.
I agree with much of what Richard argues, but would like to stress a prior
point to any discussion of obstacles to victory in Venezuela. The main
obstacle and enemy of the victory of 21st Century socialism in Venezuela,
that is the Bolivarian revolution broadly conceived, is not internal. It is
imperialism, centered both in the USNA and in Europe. The strategists of
imperial power are highly skilled and experienced in taking advantage of
internal weaknesses and mistakes, but they have additional assets - raw
power and control over ideological production on a world scale.
It is this reality that leads the Bolivarians to stress the strategic
importance of Indo-Latin American unity, of common economic strategies on
the part of South and Mesoamerican countries. We could refer to this as the
?specter of internationalism.?
Not even the stupendous dollar resources of Venezuela?s oil exports can save
the revolution short of a broader anti-imperialist response on a continental
scale. We can already see the contours of the imperialist counteroffensive
in Bolivia, in Colombia, in Peru, and here in Nicaragua. 
These are additional reasons to support Richard?s appeal for strategic
responses, and not just the broad generalizations that Mike portrays. I do
not want to diminish the vital contribution that Mike is making to our
understanding of the challenges faced by the Bolivarians. They are almost
beyond description in a short talk or essay. But, in the last analysis, or
perhaps now the next stage of the analysis, the question of class power and
anti-imperialist alliances becomes more and more central and decisive to the
outcome of the developing showdown in Venezuela.
Fortunately, I would argue, we find a very sophisticated and open leadership
in Venezuela, a team that is looking for input to help them cross hurdles
and even more hurdles after that. The outcome of the showdown will be a
function not just of a relationship of class forces, measured
internationally, but also the calibre and will of the leadership. I am too
far from the theater of the conflict the express a solid opinion on that
issue. But not so far that I can't say that so far the leadership has made
all the difference. Let's hope that this qualitative factor persists over
the next phases and beyond.
Felipe Stuart
Managua


________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: 
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40archives.econ.utah.edu