It is very easy in principle to resolve the problems with marxism which, despite its liabilities, correctly foresaw the problem with capitalism, But in practice the same rigor mortis that overtook religion seems to have overtaken marxism.
We have suggested one simple critique will jolt marxists out of their inertia: seeing through the theory of historical materialism and stages of production theory. Marx’s attempt to be a theorist backfired and saddled the left with incorrect thinking. The solution is a broader view of history along with a sense that postcapitalism requires free agents to create it. And that requires a careful blueprint of what is needed: a definition in advance of the kind of society needed. Thinking in abstractions and refusing to lay down a game plan was disastrous, as the evidence of bolshevism makes obvious in retrospect.
The left has so far failed to consider how to create an economic system that really works on the level of socialism. No use complaining of capitalists if your only resolution is stalinist stupidity. Our suggestion is to model what is needed along the lines of ‘democratic market neo-commuism‘: reconciling a complex of opposites needs careful thought. The critique of markets is easy, understanding them not so easy.
The discussions of the Green New Deal and the climate crisis generally constantly invoke the need for social transformation without anything more than a set of abstractions: the clear implication unstated is the need for revolutionary solutions. Naturally these tight lipped sites don’t dare mention the topic, or else genuinely fail to grasp what they are saying.
The call for nationalization is fairly direct but does anyone really think that is realistic via conventional politics.
Let’s proceed to socialism nationalize everything top level. Our DMNC allows three sectors with a general Commons. The whole industrial base is brought to that Commons, which is not really the same as state capitalism or state ownership.
Without nationalization, there is no reason to believe that fossil fuel companies will stop further exploration and extraction. Thus, fossil fuel nationalization should be adopted as an essential strategy for a transformative Green New Deal that replaces fossil fuel energy with renewable energy. In addition, relying on carbon sequestration to offset continued fossil fuel use is a higher risk, slower and likely much less effective strategy.
Source: The Green New Deal Must Transform the Economy
We have commented several times on this useful article (link below, and which seems influenced by our discussions here) but we should caution the implications of its discussion: the socialist left has no real program beyond a series of abstractions and the public therefore has every right, especially given the history of bolshevism, to simply reject the socialist projection as a con game for will to power types to seize control of social infrastructure and do as they please in the name of the abstract ‘ism’. This article rejects the need for a blueprint but we have suggested that the left needs a whole spectrum of blueprints: we must assure the public that we have a sound set of proposals given in detail. We can anticipate the uncertainty of the future but that is not an excuse for retreating to slogans, tidbits of marx jargon, and marx’s refusal to get specific. Continue reading “Socialist con men? refusing to specify a socialist blueprint creates a void for stalinists to fill…does the left actually have a program?”
We are reposting a post from yesterday discussing a Jacobin piece that seems to echo our take on issues of a real socialism in practice. In a moment of paranoia I thought it a kind of take off on material we have been producing here for over two years, with a whole series of books on all that: the age of kindle has arrived and we have around ten books on these issues and it is even possible to archive blog post series in kindle and we have several like that such as The Anthropocene….etc: we can list all those later.
Whether the article is truly derivative or not is a lost cause and we should be glad to be having some influence. But better watchit, the R48 group cadre could be arriving at the offices of Jacobin (in Viking helmets) to take over.
More seriously we should be a glad a new milieu is emerging that sees the need for reifications of possible socialisms. You suddenly realize that noone on the left has done their homework, has no idea what they are talking about, have no grasp of the quagmire of economic theory (nor of its history), never discuss the calculation debate, and turn to a Marx quote as a tranquilizer or I Ching to resolve all possible doctrinal issues. Continue reading “Our DMNC and an article at Jacobin…some comments…”
A century ago, on 2-6 March 1919, the first congress of the Third International took place in Moscow. This marked the birth of the Communist International, which became a vital school of revolution…
Source: 100 years on: the founding of the Communist International – Last Man There
The history of the Internationals is almost too complex for easy analysis. That of the Second is especially difficult to ‘debug’. Everything about it seems ‘right’ and yet inherent ‘flaws’ undid the whole thing. Continue reading ” Lo, the lowly ‘debugger’, remorphing incrementally…DMNC”
Nothing could illustrate more clearly the equal incompetence of the Bolivarians and the marxists. The left fails because it has no real program and Alan Woods attempt to insist on marxist orthodoxy will simply create more confusion. Woods is correct that the Bolivarians failed to complete a a revolution but then again they sensed that dogmatic marxism wouldn’t work either. Continue reading “the endless marxist bilge a sure fire way to sink the revolution…//Alan Woods’ “The Venezuelan Revolution” – now in eBook format!”