Next to marxism’s failure of vision….//Michael Harrington’s Failure of Vision – Left Voice

The critique of Harrington is cogent enough, but are Marxists in a position to stand in judgment? Their own flawed framework drives socialists into reformism, among many factors no doubt.
Harrington was right to criticize the Soviet Union, and the muddle of Marxists over the whole issue of Bolshevism has paralyzed the left. The ultimate source of the confusion is Marx himself who crippled the left with his bad theories and failure to specify what was to be done in the name of socialism. The result was Lenin, then Stalin on a socialist platter. Historical materialism was a mediocre pseudo-science. Why not just chuck it.
If the left can’t disown Lenin/Stalin, they will never get a second chance as they smother all other options. In fact, the anomaly of Russia 1917 clouds the fact that no revolutionary Marxist initiative has ever succeeded. Without exception, save Cuba, they all failed because the moment of coming into power was bungled Marxist assumptions. State ownership of capital was a mistake from the start. A system of coercion enters to reinforce the initial wrong axioms. The hard break with liberalism made democracy impossible, etc… A true socialism should be immensely popular. Instead, we see the immense disgust with socialism, fed by the right, but also by leftist confusion.

We have suggested many times a far simpler version of socialism as neo-communism in our construct or model of ‘democratic market neo-communism’. It is an erector set of potentials, and shows at once the way the Marxist framework constantly fails.
If the left can’t create a democracy it is doomed at the start. But to be sure the counterrevolution can destroy good intentions and immediately turned Leninist hopes into a covert agency domination of psychopaths.
Such system as our DMNC doesn’t destroy the capitalist state, which was an invitation to Stalinism, but remorphs a liberal state into a neo-communist extension by expropriating capital to a Commons, under its own laws and checks and balances and not subject to one-party control. Markets can operate with resources licensed from the Commons. Economic rights within an economy that can deliver would make socialism (needs a new name) very popular.
Markets, planning, can coexist very easily if done right. This kind of system can emerge from revolution or, at the outside, reform. We have discussed many versions of this, one with an indifference level below which the control factor is minimal. In another a five party state, and a set of guardians. The main issue is economic sanity in a balance of markets and planning. The coming crisis demands a core eco-socialist version.

The Marxist left keeps harping over reformists but it is in many ways they who have smothered a real left. The chance for revolution may have passed, as Marx/Engels must have sensed as they fought in the revolutions of 1848. If there is no chance of revolution then the high and mighty judgment of reformists is a fantasy. But, to be sure, the DSA/Harrington approach is stuck in its own treadmill. It is a rigged system that makes third parties impossible. The whole Bolshevik experiment accomplished nothing but to turn into Putinism. The current political paralysis will soon follow suit as the dictator syndrome arrived so swiftly with Trump.
Here the left must be the champion of democracy, ‘real democracy’, and that must be the control core around which a transition to expropriation can occur. The coming climate crisis will stage the opportunity. But Marxists have shown they will spoil every chance they get.
Time for the multiple alternatives such as our DMNC spectrum. Marxists can disband and reform overnight, and renounce their legacy of wrong thinking.

Interview with Doug Greene, author of a new biography of Michael Harrington.

Source: Michael Harrington’s Failure of Vision – Left Voice

Slavoj Žižek: Last Exit to Socialism

The best thing Zizek might do is retire, he looks light a ghost, that of lost era of bolshevism

: I cannot via Google figure if he is a Stalinist or not??? He might make an expose the failure of Bolshevism, Stalinism and look to a new sense of the term ‘socialism’. As things stand, he is negative advertisement for socialism, a term we have suggested should no longer get used in isolation, and as in relation to neo-communism with a neo-.  The field of Marx isn’t going to work. A radical shift is needed.
Our idea of ‘democratic market neo-communism’ is one way to failsafe the term ‘socialism’, which might also become ‘neo-socialism’, …

Slavoj Žižek writes in Jacobin that today’s exploding ecological crises open up a realistic prospect of the final exit of humanity itself. Might socialism be our off-ramp, or is it already too late?

Source: Slavoj Žižek: Last Exit to Socialism

 update: ////‘Communism’ strikes out in Cuba, but capitalism will not solve the problem. Whore houses and casinos are the main interest of those yankees? 

One more post on Cuba. First, do not trust the US. The US destroyed your economy with sanctions to prove that socialism doesn’t work. That’s a fraud plus, and a crime against cuban humanity. Who am I to advise anyone. But the powers that be are so stupid that even with a few points of mental X plus, I come out ahead, stupid, but less so. But the real issue here is finding some exit strategy that is better than capitalism or communism. No matter how hard they try Cubans will still be exploited by ye old Yankees. The double problem here is that capitalism will prove a debt trap, you have to borrow money while the older communism is run by an older marxism that is a monopoly of hopeless idiots. I have been suggesting a new model, DMNC, for several years, but the powers that be control larger opinion, where a blogger as here can’t really get past ten thousand readers a year and stay honest. Throw in Darwin critique and you are de facto censored. Note then that solutions exist, but the elite is far too stupid to get out of a rut, and the capitalist obsession makes it impossible. A simple set of answers exist but they won’t get past the brain-dead capitalist and/or pseudo-communist thugs/elites.
Cubans lost sixty years to pseudo-communism. They should have been a thriving socialism by now. What could work is the kind of hybrid we suggest that is planned, neo-communist, with a new kind of market, the socialist market, They can license resources to socialist entrepreneurs and thrive, with a system tries to harmonize opposites. But the current elites are too far in the past to remedy anything. Noone can give any advice. Scholars, journalists, who to say of politicians, can’t advise you, left or right. Economists can’t advise you: neoclassic economics is an outright fraud. Note that China sailed just past our DMNC model and then didn’t brake. The result was super fast development and otherwise a hopless mess, and dangerous types who think nothing of mass murder. So forget China.
But Cuba should stay on top of its prior expropriation and create a hybrid planned market system. But the elite pseudo-communists have to create democracy of some kind and they can’t be trusted on that. But sill it is possible for another hybrid: in one version we had a four party state:: a congress or parliament of three parties and a fourth party of a communist party also a presidential party. It is job is to guard the Commons. This fourth party is a sort of thought experiment in the duality democracy/authority. The latter is too tricky perhaps, but a useful exercise. Its members can never own property and must be a dedicated elite and one that can cede powers to the larger. That of course they will never do, perhaps. There are several variants. But the American rebs, with a sneaky elite in the background, ceded power to a constitutional succession. So who knows. It is a bad situation for mankind. You can’t trust politicians, you can’t trust communists, you can’t trust capitalists, you can’t trust the Pope or Christian control freaks, you can’t trust economists. So you are on your own. I fear the communist power elite in Cuba is too far gone to figure the way out. And the capitalist hyaenas are ready and waiting.

The point here is that answers are possible, but no one in the usual circles can figure out what they doing. This kind of system needs and international, but the confusions possible mount.

Source: ‘Communism’ strikes out in Cuba, but capitalism will not solve the problem. Whore houses and casinos are the main interest of those yankees? – 1848+: The End(s) of History

Taking on poor old Fox news capitalist dementia head on…//Democratic socialists ignore Cuban protesters railing against communist dictatorship | Fox News

Poor old Fox news: boilerplate against socialists sounds more and more hollow. The Foxers were right until history slips away, and leaves capitalism high and dry. Socialism is suddenly starting to look inevitable, as long as Marxists don’t wreck the last chance. But the force of reactionary strongholds isn’t going to go away based on reason. The strange and tragic damage done by an idiot such as Trump has brought out in the open a US one didn’t quite knew existed. Trumpism is breaking new record for ‘hopeless idiocy’ in denouncing vaccination. Our DMNC model is just that, a model, but one that could work the first day. Marxsm is completely stuck on an obsolete version of pseudo-communism

Anti-government protests broke out Sunday in Cuba demanding freedom and calling on an end to the country’s communist dictatorship, and yet some of the U.S.’s most outspoken Democratic socialists seem to be in lockstep by not acknowledging the historic events unfolding on the island about 90 miles from Florida.

Source: Democratic socialists ignore Cuban protesters railing against communist dictatorship | Fox News

A republic if you can keep it: the challenge of revolution: socialist democracy as the last chance option/democratic market neo-communism

In the strange situation we find ourselves in we have entered the realm of the right to revolution: the capitalism dominated republic at the last chance moment can’t move in any way to meet the crisis of climate. But what does that imply?
Given the history of the left we must disown the whole legacy, referring to the marxist cadre, which however can move into a new framework easily.???
In fact this sad situation could jackknife the left and end in a civil war of the left in addition to the right.
We have suggested that unless the left can disown the Bolshevik legacy it will inevitably revert to Stalinism, We need to propose revolution with a new approach.
We have suggested that slogans of socialism aren’t enough: we must have a complex four plus term system to proceed in a way that can invite the respect of those
who cannot trust the marxist legacy.
Our four plus term system is failsafed with a balanced set of opposites. It is a neo-commmunism that disowns all previous communisms and its four plus terms
are democracy, socialist markets, planning sciences, a Commons to which all have equal access in principle, requiring expropriation of capital in the large, a new communism with economic and liberal rights, a parliament, with three dialectical parties, a fourth presidential party of executive powers and guardian of the Commons.
It has an indifference level below with the state allows let go and a sort of free zone of personal ownership, and other organizations.
The result is not leviathan aiming toward total control.
This system requires no teleological theory and can be based on a world history given via periodization: its core epoch is simply modernity, following the rise of the Neolithic, the rise of higher civilization and proximate antiquity. The Marxist system of epochs is simply propaganda and our new approach points to the need to construct a new system and not just wait for it to happen, the vice of teleological marxism.
Revolution is justified by the logic crisis and capitalist insanity, but must offer its own failsafes: procedures of revolution, revolutionary marshals, clarity as to the status of counterrevolutionaries, habeas corpus throughout to guarantee against false jacobinism, and much else.  This system is benign but no fried to counterrevolutoinaries. Revolutionary transition must seize control of the fascist covert agencies at once, and start over with a new kind of intelligence agency.
This system can have immense appeal to those who confront the coming calamity of capitalism, climate and ecological disaster. Economic and liberal rights, even during a revolution void, and aiming to equal rights in the Commons.

There is a lot more to say here, and our model refers to the US, but then after that to a community based on a new International.

It is not a buddy system with the remnant leftists steeped in the hopeless muddle of Marxism and pervaded with crypto-stalinists with murderous jacobinism.
They need to say goodbye the useless baggage of leftism that nearly destroyed the socialist future in the era of Bolshevism

There is a lot more to say, here: our four term system needs to marginally increase its complexity as an experiment in real time. This system needs to take the next step and infused its dynamic with ecological socialism.
Leftist ideas provoke great resistance, but at the point where you realize you are dead in a system where rights aim apparently to sink civilization indifferent to capitalist catastrophe the path to our lifeboat becomes possible. The outcome is freedom but not the right to capitalist domination of resources.

———————— Notes
So, you weren’t able to keep it, what next…?
The ‘revolution’ option is enshrined in the lore of the original revolutionary outcome of American ‘democracy’. That the result wasn’t much of a democracy and points to a new future of the genre: an intelligent socialism is the prescription needed for a ‘real democracy’.
That may seem unrealistic but the future of the American system as is seems quite unrealistic…

Two Manifestos Continue reading “A republic if you can keep it: the challenge of revolution: socialist democracy as the last chance option/democratic market neo-communism”

Does Socialism Have a PR Problem? – 

New York’s second-largest city, Buffalo, has essentially elected a socialist mayor. India Walton, who calls herself “very proud” to be a democratic socialist, swept past incumbent mayor Byron Brown in Buffalo’s Democratic mayoral primary race on June 22. Walton’s victory is reminiscent of recent shocking election upsets where self-proclaimed socialists, particularly in the state of More

Source: Does Socialism Have a PR Problem? – CounterPunch.org